Template talk:Christianity footer

message: As reference just above, to add a new Christianity article to this template-- it ought to be a top-importance Christianity article. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Core topics work group/Topic list for the list of Top-importance Christianity articles. As of 1 April 2009, there are just 80 articles on the list. If you would like to remove one or add one, start a discussion on that talk page first (the list is designed to be smaller than 100 articles).  19:59, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. This isn't a high priority item for me, but I'll think about starting a discussion. I had not been aware of this working group, so I just made the edit. Since there is a structure here, I'll respect it. Bill Jefferys (talk) 20:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding new article links, only [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Core topics work group/Topic list|Top-importance Christianity articles]] 

message: I changed autocollapsed to autocollapse.  This template was showing up as uncollased (open) in all placed it showed up!  Please see :Template:Navbox if you are unfamiliar.
Nasa-verve (talk) 02:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  autocollapse(d) 

message: I've noticed that 6 months ago the issue about whether the "Denominations" section would explode into a huge list.  One solution could be to use the terminology in the "major branches of Christianity file .  Would changing the template to say "Branches" or "Streams" or something like that be an improvement over "Denominations"? Fralupo (talk) 08:11, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "Branches" instead of "Denominations"?

message: Old Catholics are not Catholics they are a protestant denomination 188.123.237.30 (talk) 20:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Old Catholics

message: hi, in the Abrahamic denominations could you please delete the 'rastafari', 'gnosticism', and 'samaritanism' due to their small numbers and undue weight  please?  The other 4 abrahamic religions bha'i, judaism, islam and christianity each have over 5 million adherents whereas the other religions each have less than 1 million. Thank you for your consideration.Jigglyfidders (talk) 11:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done:  is not required for edits to  unprotected pages, or pending changes protected pages. Are you sure you came to the right place? Because, I can't find anywhere what you are talking about. --JokerXtreme (talk) 13:52, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

text: i meant in the religion template, could you remove the 'rastafari', 'gnosticism', and 'samaritanism' due to their small numbers and therefore undue weight please?
or maybe we should reach a consensus?Jigglyfidders (talk) 21:09, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: undue weight

message: I have reverted the recent edit that removed JWs and LDSs from the template.
This should not be done unless it is discussed and there is general agreement that this is appropriate action. Bill Jefferys (talk) 22:48, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As reference just above, to change the articles linked to this template, it ought to changed on the list of top-importance Christianity articles. If you would like to remove one or add one, start a discussion on that talk page first. As of 28 Aug 2011, there are 83 articles on the list, and the list is designed to be smaller than 100 articles. --şṗøʀĸşṗøʀĸ: τᴀʟĸ 03:01, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  JWs and LDSs: Do not remove without discussion and agreement 

message: Will include 'Iglesia Ni Cristo' (Church of Christ) among non-trinitarian groups.
Chivasunrated (talk) 23:02, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Done — Bility (talk) 00:11, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 30 December 2011 

message: make Western a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Christianity
87.238.84.64 (talk) 23:31, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Done thank you. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:34, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 4 May 2013 

message: Once again, the Jehovah's Witnesses and Latter Day Saint movement are being removed from the template. These currently appear on the core topic list, so shouldn't they appear unless there is a clear consensus that they should not? Good Ol’factory (talk) 06:24, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Once again: JWs and LDS

message: Would it be possible to add a link with a logo to the Index article for Christianity (Index) on the bottom bar? Orthorhombic, 03:18, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Index 

message: I realised that in order to have a discussion of improvement, some concrete draft needs to be presented. Voilà. Feel free to improve. I tried to make the template less Euro-centric, less Protestantism-centric (yet with unproportionately more details on Protestantism still), and more emphasising the overview by means of accessing the larger branches/organisations/groups rather than arbitrarely shuffling in free-floating tenets in various subsections. The intention is to bring about a better, more collected overview. The history section has also been sized up in resolution a bit. PPEMES (talk) 00:00, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: While there are reasons to introduce the "general" sections Theology, Philosophy and Culture right under the history section but above the denominations section, don't you think it would be more WP:NPOV to illustrate the diversity of groupings before going on to try to illustrate the at best arbitrary selection of general topics? PPEMES (talk) 17:41, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: They should go right after history, at least 'Theology'. These sections are not general, but in many ways the core of the topic. The large denominations listing then follows per topic growth, and its new size alone hides the sections underneath it. Did you add or remove many items (I haven't really compared the two, although see that it seems much larger), and maybe it's time to bring John the Baptist into the Christianity template fold. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:49, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Look at how the template looked in October, 2017. A cleaner template but in need of expansion for sure, but it seems some of these topics have been removed. Where is Luther and other church figures? Point is, 'Theology' is above even History. There have been a large amount of changes, and I'm surprised no one else is commenting. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:03, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have tried to cautiously retain what could be retained arguably per WP:NPOV from the previous version. But, yeah, as you can see, for instance Nontrinitarianism doesn't cover 33 % of the section on denominations... As for Theology, Philosophy and Culture, wouldn't you agree that all of these flows from/can be traced to denominations and/or movements? As such, at least I have a hard time seeing how its selection and presentation can be WP:NPOV consolidated into this template as something above and beyond the denominations? It's hard enough to more or less arbitrary even fit something into the section alone below the denominations lists, let alone distinguish them as beyond the confinements of denominations, isn't it? PPEMES (talk) 13:10, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but of the two I like the previous version] better, but with your additions at 'Above'. The core topics were given right up front, easier to find, and the present version loses my attention pretty quickly (trying to use myself as an average reader looking at the map). I can see your expansion concept and the need for more entries. We have different perceptions, which is why a major change such as this needs other opinions and I'll wait until more editors chime in. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:18, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why don't you go ahead and place those general sections below History section if you prefer. I have stated my concerns, but if you insist on this, at least we could then have a new default to develop from. What do you think about that solution forward? PPEMES (talk) 13:26, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting that nobody else is commenting. Are you and I the only editors left on this island? Randy Kryn (talk) 11:14, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Indeed a bit odd. PPEMES (talk) 20:40, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: New draft

message: Please add Documentation after making Changes to Template. Template:Christianity footer/doc  Stalin Sunny Talk2Me 07:35, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Documentation

message: Had added Great Commandment as the second stand-alone entry in the "Theology" section, but was reverted per controversial. The two commandments, usually looked upon as a single topic, seem to be at the core of the early creation and theological point-of-view of Christianity (see Golden Rule). Viewing the other topics in the "Theology" section of the template, a link to Great Commandment doesn't seem out of place. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:54, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Many many things could be "not out of place" here but the template becomes less and less useful as gets bigger and bigger. To me, Great Commandment seems like one small (but important) part of Christian ethics, which is already in the nav box. tahc chat 19:02, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Your good faith opinions and preferences noted, yet there are other points of view (i.e., the size of the template isn't as important as its cohesiveness and topic coverage). A better place for Great Commandment would be in the early history section as another subsection of 'Jesus', which already includes Sermon on the Mount, and I would urge its placement there. If you want to confine things to the Christian ethics entry (which is shown under one word, 'Ethics') then how about adding three subsections to it: Ten Commandments, Sermon on the Mount, and Great Commandment. These major subsections should cover the important topic fine, and give a much fuller cohesive explanation of its meaning. Would point out again that although some of the topics listed under 'Theology' are debatable as "template worthy", these three are fully, historically, and directly associated with a core understanding of Christianity. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:17, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

text: Which link(s) would you consider worthy to remove? tahc chat 20:29, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: None, they are all important topics. I'm saying that the topic Great Commandment is either as important or more important in deciding the direction of Christianity. Looking at the entries again, if there is a consensus to add the Great Commandment link to the template I'd suggest it come, as mentioned above, in the Early History section as a subsection of 'Jesus' (placed just after 'Sermon on the Mount'). Please check out the template to see if that's feasible, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:58, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Great Commandment

message: Should the Hussite Wars be added to the Middle Ages subsection of the History section? They were an important forerunner to the Protestant Reformation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.172.21.81 (talk) 09:24, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Lots of thing can be said to be a "forerunner to the Protestant Reformation", but this is not a Christian history template. tahc chat 23:01, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hussite Wars 

message: The nav template has recently seen some large additions, and some whip-sawing back and forth. Maybe there should be a discussion about inclusion criteria. That is, since there are over 70,000 articles in Wikipedia on Christianity to choose from, it would make sense to have some overarching principles or guidelines on how to decide generally what to include, rather than debate articles one by one, or just randomly add them. Otherwise, I'm afraid the template could suffer from idiosyncratic nav link creep, and end up bloated beyond recognition or usefulness. Please see the discussion on a similar topic at Template talk:Christianity sidebar#Inclusion criteria. Thoughts? Mathglot (talk) 08:24, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion criteria 

message: The Crusades article in on this template is pretty much MILHIST, through WP:COMMONNAME this has settled on a scope of military campaigns to Jerusalem from 1099 to 1276. Crusading movement covers the instituitions from the 11th century, until the 19th. 
Proposal would be to swap the articles on the template. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 08:12, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: While we are at it, whatever does Islamic conquests have to do with Christianity? Objectively speaking that is. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 08:16, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Crusading movement]]