Talk:Eucharist

message: User Pbritti is determined to change the introduction of the article by saying that the Eucharist is a product without any source, he hides behind himself by saying that since the article "Blessed Sacrament" said, without any source, that the Eucharist is a product, he says that he must merge it. Although it is a lie that the article "Blessed Sacrament" says that the Eucharist is a product.
He can't merge something that simply doesn't exist in the previous article. 
I consider that the original introduction of the article be maintained, and that he stops insisting that the Eucharist is a product under the pretext that he must merge it just because the article "Blessed Sacrament" said that it is a product (although looking at the history of the article "Blessed Sacrament" this also never says that the Eucharist is a product)
So I don't understand why he insists that he must merge that the Eucharist is a product, when the article "Blessed Sacrament" simply did not say that, so he can't merge something that is simply not in the "Blessed Sacrament" article.
Rafaelosornio (talk) 13:13, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a preferred phrasing that is supported by sources? I have sourced my preferred phrasing (which you promptly reverted to "outcome", for unclear reasons). ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:49, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no word supported by sources that the Eucharist is a product or an outcome, it would be best to return to the introduction that the article already had.Rafaelosornio (talk) 16:42, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I provided two sources that use the wording I preferred. As such, the wording will be restored unless you can provide sourcing that suggests it is somehow incorrect. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:03, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia does not accept original research, you searched for those two articles in order to impose your point of view (that the Eucharist is a product), to start with the EWTN article that you put, it never says that the Eucharist is a product, and the other article on the page "stmartin-in-the -fields.org" it says that the consecrated elements are the end product of the Eucharistic Prayer. It should be discussed and compared with other sources; since no one else considers the Eucharist as a product as far as I know. Rafaelosornio (talk) 03:38, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: So, is there not a source, or is he cherry-picking the source? Regardless of what Pbritti says, clarifies, or reiterates to you, you seem to choose to take issue with it. IMO there is a clear lack of WP:AGF on your part, especially when you view cited and supported edits as "imposing" a point of view. Maximilian775 (talk) 04:17, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

text: If I remember correctly neither this article nor the one on "Blessed Sacrament" the source of "The Maryknoll Catholic Dictionary" is placed.Rafaelosornio (talk) 04:58, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, I am demonstrating that there are multiple sources available on this. I can add these additional sources, but you've removed sources when I've added them before. Will you remove them again if I add them? ~ Pbritti (talk) 05:29, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Eucharist as a product

message: It is said that Calvin believed that the eucharist should be celebrated frequently but seems to have been overruled by the "city council'" But which city? It sounds like Geneva but it could be somewhere else. Furthermore there doesn't seem to be a source for this statement. Is it an accurate statement? Spinney Hill (talk) 07:58, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reformed (Continental Reformed, Presbyterian and Congregationalist) 

message: Under the main section Ritual and liturgy there is a huge subsection "Catholic Church".  Yet this correctly immediately starts "Main article: Eucharist in the Catholic Church".
The whole purpose of such Main article:... indicators is to avoid unnecessary clogging up of the overview article (in this case, this "Eucharist" article) with detail than better belongs at that target article and to avoid duplication here at the source article.  If a section says Main article:... then the section should specifically aim to be kept brief.  See Template:Main.
So I propose a significant stripping down this section, to honour that idea of Main article:....
(A similar principle also applies later at subsection "Anglican", which similarly already has Main article: Anglican eucharistic theology so can be similarly stripped down to a summary.)
Any counter-thoughts?
Feline Hymnic (talk) 21:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not only do I agree, but you've made me realize I probably need to suggest a move on Anglican eucharistic theology to Eucharist in Anglicanism. Make what changes you deem appropriate. ~ Pbritti (talk) 22:44, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Large duplication and loss of focus