Portal talk:Religion/Archive 2

message: A completed to do list is at Portal talk:Religion/to do. Rfrisbie 15:32, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completed to do list 

message: I really like the layout, especially the tabs. It's ashame that the table drops when you click on the two left-most tabs. It drops because "< Portal:Religion" is written at the top of the page due to the software. Could this be fixed somehow? Perhaps the table on the mainpage could be lowered to match the other pages? How could this be done? --Oldak Quill 22:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Layout 

message: A new article that this project might be intertested in has been created; Mungiki. People here might like to help make it a better article. Hypnosadist 06:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Couldn't find were to put this? 

message: It is easy to miss that the headline "Religion" is a project in its own right. I'll try to change that. --KnightMove 12:16, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi KnightMove.  The previous layout was typical of portal sections with a main and several subpages.  I modified the look of your edit to be more like the style here while, hopefully, clarifying it's a link to the religion project. RichardF 14:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Portal:Religion/Projects and Things]] 

message: This isn't any selection from a holy text. The Septuagint is only a translation of Scripture! Laleenatalk to me contributions to Wikipedia 23:03, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This portal does not use dated selections.  It randomly displays subpages whenever the server's buffer is purged, such as by clicking the "Show new selections" link.  Feel free to fix whatever needs fixing at Portal:Religion/Selected scripture, e.g., Portal:Religion/Selected scripture/22. RichardF 02:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  July 26 2007 Selected Scripture 

message: These esoteric movements are purely economically inspired by purporting the notion of providing an answer to what has been written down in 
the books assigned to have been passed to humanity by god.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.79.52.46 (talk) 22:42, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strong objection against inclusion of esoteric movements such as kaballah and others 

message: You may want to consider adding newly created Portal:Scientology to Related portals section.  
And you can use the image from here for its symbol, it's from Wikimedia Commons:

Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 15:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. RichardF 22:34, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion 

message: Due to the fact that God is a main subject in religion it deserves to be put in the portal. In addition Norse mythology isn't a featured article anymore while God is a good article at present.--Seyyed(t-c) 17:21, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Replace [[Norse mythology]] with [[God]]

message: Anonymous user 84.146.XXX.XXX has an unbecoming track record of pushing its POV about Latter-day Saints and Mormonism on this portal.  This user also appears to be a major contributor to Portal:Latter-day Saints and some edits at Portal:Book of Mormon. I'm going to routinely revert this unacceptable form of edting when I see it. In addition, many of the sections are plastered with items from this religion.  If any new LDS/Mormonism items are added to this portal, I will remove them.  Furthermore, if other editors post their support here, I will remove exiting LDS/Mormonism items until their numbers are comparable to the number of items for other religions on this portal. RichardF 14:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excessive Mormonism POV pushing by anonymous user 84.146.XXX.XXX 

message: Under the categories page, the Dharmic religions link is dead. Should it be removed?
Ravewolf (talk) 20:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead Links 

message: Please comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arathi.  Is Arathi as mentioned in Githieya's, "The Formation and Development of the Arathi," The Freedom of the Spirit: African Indigenous Churches in Kenya, related to Aarti? This request is cross posted into WikiProject:AfricaTaemyr (talk) 14:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment wanted. 

message: Hello all,
I have started to move Mandaeism to Simple English Wikipedia. If anyone is interested in helping, the article  needs proofreading, as well as some simplification; Annex articles (the various other groups) probably need creating (if they are indeed to be mentioned). As we are only very few editors (and even fewer interested in religious topicsd), help would be appreciated. --Eptalon (talk) 11:33, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Mandaeism in Simple English?

message: I added Hellenismos and it seems many equally less known/accepted religions are listed.  However there is both Latter-day-saints & 'Book of Mormon,' as well as both Catholicism & Pope, not to mention both Abrahamic religion (most of them) & Bible--and Creationism.  Nothing after the first term in those pairs really needs to be in Related Portals, and I know not why Scientology and atheism (rather than non-theism, though the latter is a newer word, it seems less biased) are there rather or why most of those extra ones are in the browsebar.  Scientologists will probably get mad at me... once I skimmed a book of it and liked it--it sounded like epistemology (which I had not known is a more traditional term,) and I did not mind that it used theology, but I never got into it and have read a few Scientologists (including some late founders, reportedly) are aggressive.  Their 'Psychiatry and Nazism' article, etc. surely makes unusual points to be considered, but I am unsure many consider Scientology a religion or mainly a philosophy of science that actually accepts the idea of paying attention to theology.  Maybe they will not get mad now; I do not want to offend anyone.
If extra stuff like books and sectarian dogma viewpoints are kept in the browsebar it will get 'too big' someday.  They are also distracting--do you want people to add a portal on each of the 108 Upanishads, 108 Kangyur books, and Theosophy's detailing of such Dharma's emanation-creation-destruction theories?! ;)  A Bible portal is reasonable, but only some of its readers accept exoteric Creationism--there are at least 3 other main viewpoints.  By now it does not seem as fair to have that there as religions in the browsebar that (also) have other viewpoints.
Finally, if atheism is even in this portal, though non-theism seems (more than) sufficient, why not add agnosticism & gnosticism & Gnosticism (each is distinct,) and the many viewpoints on theism and such abstract ideas?  Also if spirituality is there, likely logic-monadology-pneumatology (each)should be, and if occultism is there, likely mysticism & esoterism should be: I am just saying this portal focuses on Latin (also it has no purely traditional Protestant Related Portal.)  I will say no more on that and Scientology, but a portal that would be liked by those who practice scientism/Philosophy would definitely have equivalent Greek-derived word portals.  Most of my links in this post are not portals yet, but if you have read to here I guess you realize--the point is Related Portals could be updated now from the browsebar: what do the project maintainers think?--Dchmelik (talk) 12:46, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  update Related Portals? 

message: Rather than list them all individually, why not a category for all of them at once?Diotemaheartsphilosophy (talk) 20:31, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Some may not just be animistic, so why not do so to the others?  Also, this 'article' is a list of portals, it is not just a category (see elsewhere for that.)--Dchmelik (talk) 17:46, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

text: While I have strong reservations about the concept of Animism as a category, it might be good to have a portal for non-civilised & non-pastoralist (ie. 'indigenous') religions/belief systems. --Hrimpurstala (talk) 13:25, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why no category "Animism" or "Animistic religions"? 

message: Please check this discussion -- Wikipedia_talk:Userboxes/Ideas#Userboxes_about_Scriptures. Maybe you would add a few suggestions there. Thanks! -- Nazar (talk) 11:54, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Holy Scriptures related Userboxes 

message: A few sections in Catholic–Eastern Orthodox theological differences have a seemingly inferior logic that perhaps affects a larger selection of subsections. Those interested who are proficient in theology, philosophy and logic, might give a helping hand by assessing relevant subsections and giving comment at the talk page HERE! Thank you for your attention, and otherwise happy editing! Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 09:01, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Expert help needed

message: I would like to bring your attention to an ongoing discussion here. Please chime in. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 06:45, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Bible verses/2010]]

message: It seems to me that the discussion here  is the strangest thing I've seen yet--both for its content and for the lack of response, given the content.  Look especially at the discussion from "Merge Virgin birth (mythology) with this article."  There are links at the bottom of the discussion for the original material and suggestions for  new title and organization. Thanks.Hammy64000 (talk) 16:38, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Miraculous births

message: For the second time User:Lectonar speeddeleted a good article with references over German catholic theologian and professor David Berger. Berger wrote as author several books and in his last book "Heiliger Schein" he wrote, that 20 to 40 percentage of catholic clergy is gay. So can someone stop here User:Lectonator and his vandalizm of this article ? Marco Frank (talk) 15:45, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[David Berger (theologian)]] 

message: It seems to me that there is a minor bias in favor of Christianity with respect to the portal topics. For exmaple, there is a link for the Bible and the Book of Mormon, but none for the scriptures of other major religions. Furthermore, there are topics concerning Christianity in India and China, but none about other religions in these or other countries. On a similar note, why do Christapheldans have their own link even though they're far smaller and more minor than denominations that aren't listed. Thoughts?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zurkhardo (talk • contribs) 03:23, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slight Christian Bias? 

message: I've noticed that the religion articles on Wikipedia are very wordy and esoteric. I mentioned this on the main religion page as well. It's hard for anyone to come into Wikipedia looking for basic information on religion and come away with any answers. I suggest an overhaul of the religion pages to make it more readable and accessible.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.10.196.97 (talk) 20:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wordiness 

message: On the "religion portal" links found in various article there's a symbol to link to other pages, with symbols for Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Taoism.  This is lame in that it represents 3 Abrahamnic religions, and no Indian ones.  If it's by population, it should have Hinduism and Buddhism.  I think the symbol should be changed - it seems both random and biased.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Obiskatobis (talk • contribs) 18:29, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  lame link symbol 

message: WikiProject Ravidassia	WikiProject Ravidassia
                      	This article is within the scope of the Ravidassia WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Ravidassia Religion.  If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. You may sign up for the project on the Participants list.. I am starting WikiProject Ravidassia.  I would like help from people who are interested.  I am working on a Portal for the topic here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:McKinseies/Portal:Ravidassia
Ravidassia
McKinseies (talk) 09:45, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Ravidassia notice 

message: It ain't Christian no more! http://www.uua.org/beliefs/principles/index.shtml and much more distinct than some of the different shades here. Bodysurfinyon (talk) 02:57, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why no Unitarian Universalism?