Talk:Assyrian Church of the East

message: I added a more vivid version of the emblem of the church, it has a bigger resolution, and more detail. 66.92.128.140 (talk) 02:23, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  new emblem 

message: There was a meeting with Mar Addai (Ancient Church of the East) about reuniting the two churches with Mar Dinkha as patriarch of the West, and Mar Addai as the Patriarch of Iraq ... I haven't heard anything more on this detail ... If anyone has more information on this it would be very helpful.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malik Danno (talk • contribs) 07:09, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unification 

message: I'm just wading into this topic, but I was surprised that Wigram is not used or referenced:
http://www.aina.org/books/itthotac/itthotac.htm
It seems to be cited quite a bit by other sources.  How reliable is it?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathan.robie (talk • contribs) 20:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should Wigram be referenced? 

message: This article is obviously bias towards the Assyrian Church. Now I'm not against the evidence presented in the article, but some of this is narrated in first person plural, which is unacceptable. That can be easily changed. I'm not saying some counter-argument needs to be presented, but some of this needs to be put in a 3rd person perspective, like "The Assyrian Church Believes this..." rather than "We believe this..."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.234.189.3 (talk) 23:28, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias 

message: There is currently discussion regarding the creation of a work group specifically to deal with articles dealing with the Eastern Catholic Churches, among others,  here. Any parties interested in working in such a group are welcome to indicate their interest there. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 16:33, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible work group 

message: I am in the process of trying to create navigation templates for each of the core articles of the Christianity WikiProject. One such template has recently been created for this topic at Template:Assyrian Church of the East. If anyone has any suggestions for how to change the template, they are more than welcome. I personally think they would most easily be seen if added below the link to the template at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Core topics work group/Templates, and would request that the comments be made on that page below the template. Please feel free to make any comments you see fit on any of the other templates on that page as well. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 17:57, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ASE navigation template 

message: It is not in fact true that the Assyrian Church of the East is the direct continuation of the main branch of the Church of the East. Rather what happened was this:
16th century:
Church of the East (non-Roman) + Chaldean Church (Roman allegiance)
Then, 19th century:
Church of the East --> Chaldean Catholic Church of the East  + Chaldean Church --> Church of the East, later adding Assyrian in 1976 by Mar Dinkha. 
The following book:
The Church of the East, an Illustrated History of Assyrian Christianity by Christoph Baumer, proves this claim, which is endorsed by Mar Dinkha himself. This article erroneously claims that the Assyrian Church of the East is the one that remained non-Roman all along, when neither did. 199.164.160.4 (talk) 22:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in apostolicity 

message: I'm doing a major rewrite of the Eastern expansion section, which is one of my specialities, and will shortly be integrating the existing material on China and Tibet with the new paragraphs that precede it.  There's a certain amount of repetition at present, and I intend to remove it.  
On the wider issue of the collapse of the 'exterior provinces' of the Church of the East, I do not subscribe to the view that Timur was to blame for smashing the Central Asian communities, and I will demonstrate why if I am given time.  In the meantime, I will be providing citations for all this new stuff over the next few days, so please don't plaster it with tags yet.
Djwilms (talk) 07:14, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eastern expansion 

message: There seems to be a lot of duplicated information in Assyrian Church of the East's Holy Synod, so I have suggested merging any remaining information from the Synod article, into this one. Thoughts? --Elonka 19:10, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: I've rewritten the first part of the article. Somebody had to. 
Where possible I've tried to make revisions to the existing text, rather than simply starting from scratch. I've tried to remain aloof as to the political controversies outlined in the article and on the discussion page. I made a point of not deleting any text, save for reasons of clarity. The section on the Council of Ephesus and the section titled Is the Assyrian Church Nestorian? should probably be merged. 
The article is still a little awkward. I hope to make further revisions, time permitting.
Daniel.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.172.26.49 (talk) 13:05, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Edits 30/3/10

message: I recently removed this material from the Church of the East article. That really wasn't the place for it; this article would be better. While much of it looks good, I didn't move it over because none of it is sourced, and I didn't want to add even more unsourced material to the article.--Cúchullain t/c 12:24, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Relations with the Catholic Church

message: This source, recently added by an anonymous editor to cite the number of members of the church, is probably not the best source to use for population data, but it will do for now. There is also some contention over the wording: the church doesn't claim "descent" from the Church of the East, it claims to be the Church of the East. There's a huge difference there, which is why I think "continuity" is the better phrasing here. Finally, we don't need to list the name of the church in various languages, especially not in the intro. One might be suitable, but three? Perhaps we can move it into its own separate section, but it does not need to be in the intro.--Cúchullain t/c 12:53, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro edits

message: The recent changes take for granted that the current Assyrian Church of the East is continuity of the historical Church of the East, to the exclusion of the others (particularly the Chaldean Catholic Church). This is not acceptable; both churches claim continuity with the historical church, and Wikipedia can't take sides. This needs to change.--Cúchullain t/c 19:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It is also silly that the link to Church of the East has been removed from the intro. That needs to be replaced.--Cúchullain t/c 19:43, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: After several days with no response I have removed some of the problematic wording. Future changes need to be discussed here on the talk page before reverting.--Cúchullain t/c 14:42, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro, again

message: *Oppose: please note that Article Church of the East deals with all the historical branches of the East Syriac Christianity, now split in three different bodies: ACoE, Chaldean Church, Ancient Church of East. Even before the splits, the body now known as ACoE was only one of the branches of the Church, known as Qochanis Patriarchate. So a merge would be very POV and historically incorrect. A ntv (talk) 10:42, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  July 2011 proposed merge of [[Church of the East]] with [[Assyrian Church of the East ]] 

message: There are two lists of archdioceses and dioceses, but there are some inconsistencies between them so I can't just delete one. (Syria vs Syria and Lebanon probably isn't an issue, but the different divisions of the US is.) Lavateraguy (talk) 20:59, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplication 

message: In contrast to the above rejected proposals of merging this article with Church of the East, I propose moving much of its history section prior to this denomination's establishment in 1692 to Church of the East. Chicbyaccident (talk) 13:46, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move chunks of history section to [[Church of the East]] 

message: This article, as constructed, is about the relatively modern branch of Assyrian/Chaldean Christianity known as the Assyrian Church of the East that began in 1692 (for the main historical branch of Assyrian/Chaldean Christianity, the relevant article is Church of the East). One user (User:Jazon7) has repeatedly edited the infobox to partially confuse this point by changing the origin date to "Apostolic Age" without (1) explaining the changes or why they are being made, (2) justifying the new claim, (3) making it consistent with the rest of the infobox (which claims that the Assyrian Church of the East was founded by the 17th-century Shimun XIII Dinkha), or (4) making it consistent with the rest of the article (which claims in its opening sentence that the Assyrian Church of the East was "founded in 1692"). It should also be noted that all along the infobox has acknowledged the fact that the Assyrian Church of the East "Traces apostolic succession to Thomas the Apostle, and Bartholomew the Apostle through the Church of the East, according to its tradition." This may be editing in good faith, but it is undermining the quality of this article by introducing inconsistencies. LacrimosaDiesIlla (talk) 13:05, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  When was the Assyrian Church of the East founded? (Recent Edits) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Assyrian Church of the East. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151008040634/http://news.assyrianchurch.org/2015/03/26/holy-synod-announcement-passing-of-catholicos-patriarch/9534 to http://news.assyrianchurch.org/2015/03/26/holy-synod-announcement-passing-of-catholicos-patriarch/9534
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_11111994_assyrian-church_en.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:58, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There has been some debate here about the foundation date and historical continuity of the Assyrian Church of the East. In its present form, this article places the founding date in 1692, and the same year is also mentioned in several other related articles. But unfortunately, and not surprisingly, there is one common problem with all those claims - not a single one is referenced! At first, I did not suspect the date itself, but then I saw that most prominent modern scholars, like Wilhelm Baum and Dietmar Winkler (2003) are placing the breakup of Shimun XIII with Rome in 1672, not in 1692. The year 1672 is also mentioned in the same context in works of Heleen Murre (1999) and Wolfgang Hage (2007). I searched some reference for 1692, but found non outside older secondary literature. Modern scholars in their analytical works point to 1672 as the year when union of Shimun line with Rome ended. So, lets discuss this. Sorabino (talk) 20:05, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't sound to me like there's anything to debate. If you've got sources that say 1672, and there are no reliable sources (here or elsewhere that you've seen) that say 1692, it sounds like it's time to just change the date to 1672 everywhere and provide appropriate sourcing this time. LacrimosaDiesIlla (talk) 16:08, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agree. Chicbyaccident (talk) 18:10, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, I will add some new references and make some changes regarding the year 1692, but that will solve just one part of the problem. The question of historical continuity of the Assyrian Church of the East is very complex, and it was debated several times without final and productive conclusion. That is why I wanted to initiate this talk by checking some simple facts. It seems to me that a very good solution was found regarding the question of historical continuity of the Chaldean Catholic Church. Similar problems of separate lines and various discontinuities were resolved there by pointing to two main years, 1552 and 1830. Such approach allows us to view the complex history of the Chaldean Catholic Church with necessary broadness, specially regarding the turbulent period between 1552 and 1830. It seems to me that similar approach should be made to the history of the Assyrian Church of the East. In other words, we need some consistency here. All lines and branches that wanted union with the Catholic Church constitute one historical movement that is rightly recognized as the history of "Chaldean Catholic Church", regardless of various formal discontinuities. By the same standard, we should acknowledge the fact that various lines and branches that wanted to keep their ancient theological and ecclesiological traditions also constitute one single historical movement that should be recognized here as the history of the "Assyrian Church of the East", regardless of similar formal discontinuities. So, we must find the way to apply the same encyclopedic criteria for both communities and all relevant articles. I would like to hear some thoughts on that. Sorabino (talk) 20:17, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  What you're suggesting sounds appropriate to me. I guess I'm not sure where you think this framework needs to be applied though. I thought the various articles were already more or less doing what you're describing. LacrimosaDiesIlla (talk) 17:59, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am not suggesting a merger of this article (Assyrian Church of the East) with the article Church of the East, as was proposed by some other editors in previous discussions. Such merger would not be useful, since modern Assyrian Church of the East represents a branch of the Church of the East. Main traditional branch, I might add, but still a branch. For example, old Church of the East was pan-ethnic, while modern Assyrian Church of the East is very much ethnocentric. I am not saying that ethnic focus is something bad, on the contrary, but that characteristic clearly differentiates modern Assyrian Church of the East from its mother-church, the medieval Church of the East. So, I think that we should treat entire period from the middle of 16th to the beginning of 19th century as a transitional period, in a same manner as it was done in the article on the Chaldean Catholic Church. There, history of various branches and lines that were united with the Catholic Church was rightly incorporated into one narrative. Therefore, I think that the same period in the history of the Assyrian Church of the East should include: the history of the senior Eliya line of Alqosh, and the history of junior Shimun line (after its breakup with Rome). Only after 1804, when last patriarch of the traditionalist Eliya line died and his branch decided not to elect a successor, final unification and consolidation of traditionalist branches and groups was enabled under the leadership of the patriarch of the Shimun line. Similar process of unification of branches and groups led to the final institutional consolidation of the Chaldean Catholic Church in 1830. As there are two main milestones in the history of the Chaldean Catholic Church (1552, 1830), we should also recognize similar milestones in the history of the Assyrian Church of the East. It is not proper to say, as it is currently stated in this article, that modern Assyrian Church of the East was created in the moment when Shimun line broke with Rome, because that cuts out the entire senior Eliya line from its history. As  I mentioned before, only after 1804 we have final institutional unity of the traditionalist branch, and only after 1830 we have final institutional unity of the branch united with Rome. Therefore, we must find proper descriptive formulation for the statement on the origin of the Assyrian Church of the East, that was finally reunited in 1804, while emphasizing that its previous history includes the history of the senior Eliya line and the history of the junior Shimun line (after its breakup with Rome), thus encompassing entire transitional period from the middle of the 16th century up to the 1804. Sorabino (talk) 19:19, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds like you have a better command of the details than I do, and I think you should go ahead and start rewriting. Be WP:BOLD! If you are concerned about launching out on your own, feel free to do work in your sandbox, and I'm sure myself or some other editors here would be happy to look over your work before it gets incorporated in the article here. LacrimosaDiesIlla (talk) 21:14, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, sounds reasonable. Chicbyaccident (talk) 09:00, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Debate about 1692 ? 

message: If "Eliya line" is a term of art in the literature, then I think we can use it without scare-quotes either as Eliya Line (or possibly Eliya line, without the additional capitalization). On the other hand, if it's a term that was created by our editors and basically exists on Wikipedia, then it needs scare-quotes and we should probably phase it out in favor of a term used in the literature. LacrimosaDiesIlla (talk) 14:13, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question. The term was coined by historians, and in scholarly literature it is used in both forms, as Eliya Line, or Eliya line. Basic search of literature on Google Books search engine shows that both variants are used with the same meaning: Google Books search results for the term: Eliya Line or Eliya line. I seems to me that there is a slight preference for the form without additional capitalization. Sorabino (talk) 20:52, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  If it exists as a term of art in the published literature, then we should definitely skip the scare-quotes around it. LacrimosaDiesIlla (talk) 22:55, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, during the process of editing I will remove such quotes from the names of the patriarchal lines. Sorabino (talk) 16:15, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Eliya line" or Eliya Line 

message: I am thinking the intro goes into two much detail for an intro, I will begin working on shortening.... help requested and appreciated. Sethie (talk) 06:58, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Feedback on the intro

message: The article on the "Oriental Orthodox Churches" says that they are united by their acceptance of the first three ecumenical councils only. Would it be fair to say that the ASE is distinguished by her acceptance of the first 2 ecumenical councils only? --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 13:05, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: So-so, but you may add that information on Church of the East. Chicbyaccident (talk) 17:38, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Council of Ephesus 

message: The emblem is constantly being resized to a size of a website favicon (35px) from it's original size of 155px. The latest change was done by TheTexasNationalist99. I have stated in earlier revisions to take it to the talk page if there is any issue with the emblem being the size of 155px, but nobody has. ((talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 04:34, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe because in particular, the set standard for such logos and emblems has been set to the resized variant? --TheTexasNationalist99 (talk) 15:52, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Where can I find the "set standard for such logos and emblems"? The only church article with a small emblem size I found on Wikipedia was the Catholic Church which had an emblem size of 25px. --Sargonmalik (talk) 14:35, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emblem being resized? 

message: (As per ) I am pretty sure the quote is not long enough to be copyvio. What policy are you referring to say the quote is too long? Veverve (talk) 07:14, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: See this with regards to the imprecise science of it all but when I worked with this sort of thing in my day job, more than 30 consecutive words was well within violation territory. This is especially true when the entirety or significant portion of a definition is presented (even with attribution). ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:54, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I really feel those at your day job were overzealous. I have seen way longer quotes in PhD and master's thesis. To me, the less than 150 words here are far from violating copyvio. Veverve (talk) 16:29, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'll defer to you here, but as a basic principle I think that quotations that serve little more than the citations they're attached to are unnecessary risks of copyvio claims. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:24, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyvio? 

message: Just want to add the following to the See Also section.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_East_in_China Alawaus (talk) 02:19, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. - FlightTime (open channel) 02:24, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 2 July 2022 

message: :There are twelve entries in the "External links". Three seems to be an acceptable number and of course, everyone has their favorite to add for four. The problem is that none is needed for article promotion. 
*ELpoints #3) states: 
*LINKFARM states: 
*WP:ELMIN: . 
*WP:ELCITE:   -- Otr500 (talk) 15:45, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: This illustration is not an Assyrian icon. It is an Armenian illustration with Armenian words describing the various elements of the illustration. Vikenab (talk) 20:56, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "Nestorian Evangelion"