Article has already been assessed as A-Class by the Saints and Catholicism projects, curious as to whether this project would also give such a ranking. John Carter 14:41, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
The amount of pictures makes the layout somewhat messy.
Is it Regina caeli (213.000 Google hits) or Regina coeli (711.000 Google hits)? My memory of Latin classes (which is very long ago) says the latter.
Can Bible sources really be used as references? This looks to me to be original research. Try to find a secondary source.
Some statements need sourcing. I've added an example, where it is stated that some speculate, but no ref is given. There are very few refs for an article this size, and it becomes even less when the Bible refs are discounted.
I find the use of Bible references like Matthew 27:55 or Quran references like [Quran23:50]} in the body of the text very irritating.
As it is now, I guess I would lean more towards oppose than towards support. Errabee 00:04, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Oppose - Opposition seems reasonable based on the points above. John Carter 14:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Oppose - Per above! Especially the Bible as a fact source is questionable. If the article had said that the Bible claims, it might have been better, but it's presented as fact. - Duribald 16:19, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.