Template talk:WikiProject Religion

message: I would strongly suggest that if this project is intended to cover religion in general, get rid of the graphic that shows a pair of hands in a rather specifically Christian prayer position. It is possible that Christianity is not the only religion that uses this posture to indicate prayer, but I can tell you definitively that Judaism does not, nor do several neo-pagan religions I'm familiar with, nor any of several forms of Buddhism. It would be much better to have no graphic at all than to have this one. Can you really be surprised that a number of Jews were offended when this was placed on Jewish-related articles? I'm not even a practicing Jew, and I found it offensive. - Jmabel | Talk 06:34, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Support - I agree that we should change the graphic of Albrecht Dürer's "Praying Hands" (originally titled, I believe, "Hands of the Apostle"). While hands in this position of prayer is used in religions other than Christian, it is most assuredly not universal. This specific painting is Christian, making it unsuitable for the Religion project. I would recommend a multi-icon graphic or no graphic at all. This graphic should represent the scope of the project, not to insert a Christian symbol on articles about other religions. Nightngle 15:35, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that nothing can be all inclusive, so that makes finding the right graphic difficult. I do like the graphic you found better. I'd like to hear from more folks working on religion projects to see what their take is on this. I've inserted a placeholder graphic (just a pretty sunset) until a decision can be reached. Nightngle 14:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, my first impulse was to find a picture of a statue of a man engaged in meditation. Upon being seen, several individuals misconstrued from the name of the image that the picture was of thousand-eyed Brahma, with most of his eyes apparently not visible in the statue itself, as only two could be seen, in the standard locations. I also have significant reservations regarding the clasped hands, as it is not only specifically Christian but also only applicable in the recent history of Christianity. The only reason it was chosen at all was for its virtually immediate recognition as being of someone (or parts of someone) engaged in prayer. Honestly, I would think that an image showing a person in one of the traditional postures of meditation would probably be the one that might work best, if one can be found which isn't derided for some reason or other. The disadvantage of the Symbols of religion graphic is that we pretty much don't deal directly with most of the religions whose symbols are included, and would probably be accused of "claim-jumping" of one sort or other if we did use it.  Alternately, if someone were to be able to create a similar image using symbols of some of the religions we would directly deal with, that might work well too. Personally, I am just about at the Simon Templar stick-man level of artistic accomplishment myself, so I wouldn't even attempt it myself. Of course, as a stand-in, as it were, maybe just a good sunrise or sunset, or maybe an image of sunlight through clouds, like on the  banner. I have every reason that image could be freely used, as I just added it to the banner a few days ago myself. Badbilltucker 15:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the current clouds image is admirable. --Dweller 16:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The more I think about it, the more I like having a cloud/landscape for the graphic. A representation of a person is not appropriate (or forbidden) for some religions, having graphics icons that represent religions can't be all inclusive and I don't like leaving anyone out, so a more metaphoric representation seems best. I wouldn't want to copy the Sprituality Project's graphic, so maybe the clouds would be a good choice. I picked it for it's rich colors, especially so it would look good small, and I like the color gradation as well. Nightngle 16:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Graphic on template

message: Isn't this template kinda redundant when there will be most of the time be a more specific template that exists. I think we have templates for all of the Major world religions now. GizzaChat © 07:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As stated on the project page, the project is primarily focused on those religions which do not fall within the scope of any of the other projects. The template is intended for use on such articles. ch do not fall within the scope of any of the other projects. There are a lot of such articles relating to these lesser known religions (Baha'i, Ayyavazhi (whose followers claim status as a separate religion), Ghost Dance, :Category:Ancient Semitic religions, and more. I am currently in the process of trying to add the appropriate banners of the smaller-scope projects to all the articles relevant to their own projects, so that we can know which other ones this banner should be placed on. Badbilltucker 17:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundant 

message: I just added an image to the template, if this is okay. I noticed that there was a discussion going on about this, so if I've preempted something, please, revert. I personally think that an image is necessary for visual recognizability. Also, since it was brought up, I support the use of this template, especially for very general articles on religion. For example, I just added this to the article Religious order, an article which seems designed to collect a broad consensus. Alekjds talk 15:05, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just further read the above conversation (should have done so before adding the image, apologies), and while it seems that a compromise was reached, I would strongly recommend having an image in the left compartment. Since there are hundreds (maybe?) of other WikiProjects out there, each one should have some distinctive symbol that, when placed in a bank with the others, distinguishes it from the rest. While I agree that the "Religion portal" symbol is indicative of the scope of this particular project, having a larger, bold image is important in its own right. The image which I added impetuously is a good one, I believe, as it has no real POV and includes all the major religions which this project would cover. Anyway, cheers. Give it some thought, but by all means, let me reiterate that I would not be offended by a revert, since I should have inspected the matter deeper before just adding something. Alekjds talk 15:10, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: Can someone here please check out Talk:Noah's Ark? Until the other day, this template was fine, but it's squashed up in one corner. Cheers, Ben (talk) 01:07, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone had used the small=yes option. I've removed it. Martin 21:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Martin. Cheers, Ben (talk) 01:04, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something broke? 

message: On the sandbox I've started a conversion of this template to  the meta banner which all projects are gradually moving to. It's not quite finished yet, but you can get a good idea of what it will look like (not much different from your current one). It won't be implemented unless it can function 100% as desired. That said, are there any other concerns? Martin 21:41, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: . Any problems please let me know. Martin 19:06, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Banner Meta 

message: At Talk:Rick Alan Ross, the Template:WikiProject Religion throws the following error (in preview mode when editing the whole page or the top of it): . The code in question is: . This appears to comply with the documented parameters.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:29, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strange `FalunGongImp` error