Bible Project‑class

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible articles Project This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Archives

2004 – August 2005 Old project pages Old discussions at overhaul 2009–13 2014–15 2016–February 2017 March 2017 to six months ago

Hello, Please note that Bible, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 5 June 2023 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI teamReply[reply]

There is an RM at Zechariah (New Testament figure) of relevance here. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:25, 23 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at WP:ELN § Templates being used to embed external links into articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:44, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Has there been any discussion here of merging the Corinthian-pages to First Epistle to the Corinthians? See, for example, diff, edit-summary "no material worth merging." Pinging user:Beland to join the discussion. Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:12, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have not opened a previous discussion about merging chapter-specific articles into the book article. This page and many others were created by the since-banned User:JohnThorne and consist almost entirely of snippets of Bible text translation and some willy-nilly commentary. This user was apparently in the habit of adding copyrighted material, excessive detail, and original research. The content of these articles does not follow NPOV very well, as the random comments tend to represent a single POV on a given phrase. There are thousands if not millions of one-off comments on these verses, so picking one or two is somewhat random, and including all of them is not feasible. What we can do is talk about important or notable controversies concerning specific passages, and where these articles contain that sort of content, I've been merging it up to the article on the whole book. I've also been merging up objective and factual context about these books, but most of that is formulaic and repeated across every chapter article (which means merging them saves a lot of space and makes reading a lot easier). -- Beland (talk) 22:01, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was wondering if the "Faith alone without works is dead (2:14-17)" section of the James 2 page should be prefaced by stating that it is a certain opinion. I apologize if it is fine the way it is. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=James_2&action=edit&section=13 Cartedit (talk) 02:26, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello everyone! I think it would be a good idea to add the Historicity section from the OT page to the HB page. Seems to be an equally important topic to both pages. Thoughts? IncandescentBliss (talk) 06:29, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not my area of expertise. It’s using good sources, but not the most recent. Needs to be updated with more recent scholarship. IncandescentBliss (talk) 19:13, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

They are already on restriction at Israel-Palestine conflict pages. Can we ban or restrict them from Bible pages? IncandescentBliss (talk) 05:20, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There’s a content dispute at Ten Commandments and I’d love help to establish academic consensus on the page. An editor who is restricted on Israel-Palestine pages is deleting any of my edits (even when I’ve used their own sources). Doesn’t seem like anyone else is active over there so would love help. IncandescentBliss (talk) 22:07, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]