Talk:Bible quiz

message: This page is being monitored because of frequent vandalism. Posting nonsense remarks about specific teams in a Bible Quiz/Bowl competition is not only not within the spirit of any such competition, it is a violation of Wikipedia editing guidelines. Violators may be blocked from editing articles on Wikipedia. Realkyhick 04:55, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: please make quizs 47.34.30.212 (talk) 20:58, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

text: People being stupid, mainly. I won't go into specifics, except to say that it happened in multiple sections. Realkyhick
You removed the last paragraph of the section on Bible Quiz Fellowship, making the reference nonsensical. I am replacing it, but I will be careful to avoid sounding like advertising. If you don't like it, go ahead and reword it, but the BQF website is the place for additional information about quizzing in general, not to verify information about nationals.One Wheel (talk) 13:28, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Jeff, I don't think splitting this into separate pages for each denomination is necessary just yet. The article is considerably longer than when I first wrote it (or converted it from the original "Bible Bowl" article), but it's not too long - for now. I'm more concerned about the availability of free wi-fi at Tuscon next summer, or your ability to hack into some. :-) Realkyhick 05:16, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Couldn't there be a brief summary on this page, as well as individual pages for the denominations? I think that Nazarene Quizzing has its own page, ideally each group would as well. It would be a lot of work to write all those pages, but it could happen bit by bit, with people writing about their denomination. One Wheel (talk) 13:18, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

text: I have tried to get BQF a page, but people have said that it is not notable enough. Fine, but when I was looking up information about BQF to expand the stub in this page I ran across the Young Entrepreneurs Alliance. A lack of independent external sources was also mentioned, a charge to which the article on the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association is definitely vulnerable. I don't believe that anybody could argue that the BGAE is not notable enough, and allowing the Young Entrepreneurs Association a page, especially one as blatantly promotional as Young Entrepreneurs Alliance's, and not allowing BQF is questionable at best. Anybody care to tell me what the unpublished rules are for when to apply the published rules?One Wheel (talk) 03:05, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please bear in mind that the fact that one article exists is not justification for another. It usually means that the existing article simply hasn't received attention from another editor — Wikipedia is pretty large, after all. In this case, the YEA article has now been proposed for deletion. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 13:59, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

text: National Bible Bowl certainly looks like it could use a separate article. Why, it’s about article length already! It appears to be notable to me (although I just don’t know much about this particular organization): Google News returns quite a few results.—Jchthys 13:12, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

message: Please help clean up this article by better citing sources.  "Sites that have been used as sources in the creation of an article should be cited in the article, and linked as references, either in-line or in a references section. Links to these source sites are not "external links" for the purposes of this guideline, and should not be placed in an external links section."  See Wikipedia:Citing sources and Wikipedia:External links for more information.
:I'm adding the OR tag to the whole article.  Most of the article is original work with no sources or demonstrated notability.  The official websites for each particular denomination's quiz activity are not adequate sources, nor do they establish the notability of the subject overall.  The only outside sources provided really refer to Youth for Christ, so this article should maybe even be merged with Youth for Christ.  I'll hold off on formally suggesting that for now to see if Original Research concerns can be resolved or if notability can be demonstrated beyond the fact that there are a bunch of Bible quiz websites out there.                  12.119.59.246 (talk) 06:48, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The original research tag is erroneously applied here, and I have removed it. You can argue that the sources provided are primary sources, though I doubt that would apply to an article about Bible quiz/bowl in general because the sites are from different sources. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 08:13, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template added.  Cited Sources and External Links should be separate. 

message: After mistyping your name in searches to respond, I realized what it stands for.  Ahm from Masurah myslelf, but I was dating a wonderful woman last year, who is a real KY hick.  Before that she was about the only person who visited my mother in the hospital for months before she recently died of cancer.  Tautologist (talk) 23:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: This new article appears to duplicate soem material.  That other one, National Bible Bee, should be merged into this one, Bible quiz. Bearian (talk) 21:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don’t think it so much duplicates any material, it may just be an issue of notability. See the talk page at Talk:National Bible Bee.—Jchthys 22:57, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Just passing through - I'd suggest against a merger. This article is 61k so far and the other is 48k (and better referenced and laid out). It would be unwieldy to expand this article to 40-50k on each notable competition. Better to keep this as a good overview and split off the other articles. Cheers, Paxse (talk) 19:26, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[National Bible Bee]] 

message: Does anyone else agree that the section on Bible Bowl unnecessarily repeats a lot of information given in its own article? It should be abbreviated with a ‘main article’ template.—Jchthys 23:46, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I assume you mean National Bible Bowl. I agree; trim this section way down and link to the main article. The Nazarene section could probably use the same treatment. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 03:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I also think Assemblies of God Bible Quiz is notable enough for its own article. Does anyone care to do the forking?—Jchthys 16:14, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think so too, but I have a conflict of interest so I can't do it. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 20:26, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bible Bowl 

message: It seems to me that those two competitions have drastically different origins and questions types. They will be better split into two different articles. Combining them is very confusing. Bible Bowl is based on Trivia (or "knowledge") questions, whereas Bible Quizzing is about direct memorization and recall of verses. Quizzing is decidedly NOT trivia. Pinkslimo (talk) 07:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separation of Bible Bowl and Bible Quizzing into two articles 

message: We could put the version that each variant uses in their summary. I think it would be a good helpful addition. Rebel4theName (talk) 02:00, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Versions used 

message: — Assignment last updated by Bnesheim3 (talk) 03:06, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: ENGL 101 English Composition