Wikipedia talk:Notability (Religious texts)

Biblical commentaries[edit]

The text of the Biblical commentaries section doesn't jibe with Wikipedia:Notability (books). Why would all Biblical commentaries be considered inherently notable? Kaldari (talk) 23:25, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And, shouldn't there be something about reliable sources in here as well. Drunken Pirate (talk) 10:54, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Point of view[edit]

Also the Point of view section seems to imply that it's OK to not strictly stick to the WP:NPOV policy when writing about religious texts. This should be corrected or removed. Kaldari (talk) 23:29, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Really necessary?[edit]

Can you point me to an AfD outcome that would be different had we relied on this proposed guideline, rather than the already established one at WP:NB? Until convinced such an example exists, I must oppose this proposal as unneccessary and a perfect example of instruction creep. UnitedStatesian (talk) 21:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also oppose this proposal. Religious texts could be easily covered in a section of Wikipedia:Notability (books); there is no need to create a separate guideline. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 15:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hearing nothing else, I have marked this as failed. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:10, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]