| Revision as of 21:16, 21 June 2005 editKaldari (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers68,434 editsm →Jesus article← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:16, 21 June 2005 edit undoKaldari (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers68,434 editsm →Jesus article: fixing linksNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ==Jesus article== | ==Jesus article== | ||
| I have to disagree with the statement that the primary article on ] is (or ever should be) of him as a religious figure. There are numerous articles like ]] which ARE from a religious view. I seriously doubt non-qualified articles in wikipedia should EVER be from a religious viewpoint. It is on this issue that the proposed compromise will likely hang. Bte, there has been peace on this issue in the Jesus article for some time.--] 20:38, 2005 Jun 21 (UTC) | I have to disagree with the statement that the primary article on ] is (or ever should be) of him as a religious figure. There are numerous articles like ] ] which ARE from a religious view. I seriously doubt non-qualified articles in wikipedia should EVER be from a religious viewpoint. It is on this issue that the proposed compromise will likely hang. Bte, there has been peace on this issue in the Jesus article for some time.--] 20:38, 2005 Jun 21 (UTC) | ||
| :Although I agree that the article on Jesus should not be written from a Christian point of view (since I'm an agnostic myself), I do think the article is (and should be) primarily about his role as a religious figure in Christianity, since that is the main reason for his notability (though certainly not the only reason). ] 20:46, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC) | :Although I agree that the article on Jesus should not be written from a Christian point of view (since I'm an agnostic myself), I do think the article is (and should be) primarily about his role as a religious figure in Christianity, since that is the main reason for his notability (though certainly not the only reason). ] 20:46, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 21:16, 21 June 2005
Jesus article
I have to disagree with the statement that the primary article on Jesus is (or ever should be) of him as a religious figure. There are numerous articles like Christian views of Jesus Life of Jesus according to New Testament which ARE from a religious view. I seriously doubt non-qualified articles in wikipedia should EVER be from a religious viewpoint. It is on this issue that the proposed compromise will likely hang. Bte, there has been peace on this issue in the Jesus article for some time.--JimWae 20:38, 2005 Jun 21 (UTC)
- Although I agree that the article on Jesus should not be written from a Christian point of view (since I'm an agnostic myself), I do think the article is (and should be) primarily about his role as a religious figure in Christianity, since that is the main reason for his notability (though certainly not the only reason). Kaldari 20:46, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
It should be about Jesus, his role in Christianity being a major topic, but not exclusively. To do otherwise would violate NPOV --JimWae 21:01, 2005 Jun 21 (UTC)