Talk:Seventh-day Adventist Church

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Peer review Seventh-day Adventist Church has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
Former FA This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Seventh-day Adventist Church is part of WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Seventh-day Adventist Church and Seventh-day Adventist Church-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church To-do:
Good articles Seventh-day Adventist Church has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do.
If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.

To-do list for Seventh-day Adventist Church:

 edit - history - watch - refresh

Origins

  • Needs a definite structure, this could look like:
  1. Religious climate in the US (Second Great Awakening)
  2. Background of the Millerite movement
  3. The Great Disappointment
  4. Edson's vision
  5. Crosier/Edson and co explanation
  6. Rachel Oakes Preston introduces the Sabbath
  7. Visions of Ellen G. White
  8. Legal organisation
  9. Global missionary movement
  10. 1888 Bible conference
  • This needs to be well referenced and talk about establishment of the movement. Phrases such as This message was gradually accepted and formed the topic of the first edition of the church publication, The Present Truth should be avoided. (The phrase is insider POV).

Doctrines

  • Needs referenced comments on the overall "vibe" of the statements of beliefs. Needs both official and outsider viewpoints.

Sabbath

  • Needs to be trimmed to around 3 paragraphs of 4-6 sentences. An appropriate outline would be:
  1. 2 sentences on history - Rachel Oakes Preston and then sunset to sunset conclusion.
Archive
Archives
  1. April 2004 – 5 March 2006
  2. Discussion regarding Graham Maxwell
  3. 15 February 2006 – 21 March 2006
  4. 26 March 2006 – 2 April 2006
  5. 2 April 2006 – 24 April 2006
  6. 19 April 2006 – 13 October 2006


Contents

[edit] To-do's for this article - "Can you help?"

Lets try to continue working towards a featured article, if possible. Currently the content is still rather weak and is also poorly referenced. Here are my suggestions on what need to be improved, feel free to add your own points: MyNameIsNotBob 00:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Beliefs section. Currently this is a very brief summary, apart from the Sabbath section. One would almost be better off just reading the Fundamental Beliefs statements for themselves. The sections that are there currently need to be expanded and referenced from a number of sources. Currently the only two sources that are used in that section are the "Fundamental Beliefs" and "What we believe..." Adding some context and insight to each of these statements would be of great benefit. The section also lacks an explanation of the Adventist belief in "Investigative Judgment". Is there someone brave enough to write that?
Hi, I'm fairly new here, but I've made quite a few changes. I thought it would be a good idea to start a separate Seventh-day Adventist doctrine article which can go into more depth about a range of doctrinal issues (including the SDA distinctives). That way we can keep this article's doctrine section brief. I've also been "brave" enough to expand the investigative judgment article :-) Tonicthebrown 12:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I think that the section should be brief. The last time I touched that section my intention was to consider Adventists as adherring to mainstream evangelical theology, except diverging on three significant issues: state of the dead, sanctuary, and Sabbath. The only other thing worth clarifying is Adventists pre-millenial stance. -Fermion 07:42, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
SDAs also diverge from mainstream theology with the "great controversy" and "remnant" doctrines. I've expanded the "Second coming" section to include a clarification of the premillennial position. (Now moved to the Seventh-day Adventist doctrine article.) I've also created a new article - Eschatology (Adventist) which explains SDA end-times teaching in more detail, and what SDAs believe about the millennium.Tonicthebrown 12:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Well what deserves inclusion, is what I did to the Sabbath part too much? Its hard to tell, there is no standard to go by. It strikes me as odd though that nothing is said about our sanctuary doctrine. MyNameIsNotBob 07:56, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I've added some material on the sanctuary, but perhaps it could be expanded further. May even deserve a separate article, if someone is inclined to do the work. Tonicthebrown 12:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Images. Currently the article is only text apart from the logo at the top. I am not sure the fair use tag on the image is properly justified either, I believe it can be and I have an email from the church verifying that. Is there someone familiar with fair use who can verify what needs to be done with that logo. Also another image or two might be nice to improve the asthetics of the aticle. Does someone have a camera with which they can go photograph a church building?
What about an image of White or Bates? Or a classic second coming illustration?
I have put the photo of the Whites in there. Would like a church building as well, and maybe one other. MyNameIsNotBob 07:56, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Origins section. This section is seriously lopsided, and not much help comes from the History of the Seventh-day Adventist Church page. Is there someone else interested in history research who can help me expand this? My main inhibition is lack of resources. Currently I am working off my brother's college textbooks and resources, which I have to steal to use :-).
You might try and find "Lightbearers", as it is a very effective Seventh-day Adventist history book. User:MilquetoastCJW
As in Schwarz and Greenleaf? Ansell 04:44, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
I think thats what Milque is refering to. Thats one of my brothers textbooks that I steal when i get the chance. I have used it on History of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. MyNameIsNotBob 08:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suggested major improvements

  • Origins section has too many details, which would be better placed in the main article. Also, the "to do" list has far too much history in my opinion, which doesn't all belong in this article.
  • Sabbath activities also could be shortened, maybe new article possible, but be careful of POV forking as there is already a Sabbath article (see my comments elsewhere)
  • Mission needs expanding
  • How about merging Mission, Outreach, Publishing and Membership into "Membership and Outreach" or similar? (Why do we publish? It's for members and outreach.)
  • Also, it doesn't have much of an international feel.

Main sections could be: Origins, Doctrine, Membership and outreach, Lifestyle and customs (subheadings: "Sabbath activities" and "Health, diet and sexuality"), Structure, polity and institutions, Movements and offshoots and Outsider criticisms. I think this would improve the structure of the page.

Having said that, the article is coming along well. Good job everyone! -Colin MacLaurin 20:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Make sure we haven't left off any major organizations.[1] -Colin MacLaurin 09:19, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA Re-Review and In-line citations

Note: This article has a very small number of in-line citations for an article of its size and currently would not pass criteria 2b.
Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. Agne 22:34, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Subcultures section

I can see the idea behind the new section however I am concerned about how encyclopedic it actually is. Our biggest problem on this article at this point in time is its severe lack of references. This needs to be addressed ASAP, and adding more unreferenced material just makes the problem worse. MyNameIsNotBob 09:46, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the material is OR as is. Focusing on references is a definite first step. No time here right now, sorry bout that. Ansell 21:38, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] operates six international channels...

Could someone substantiate the recent edits which refer to the church as operating six international channels. Not sure about it. Ansell 21:38, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Logo fair use

Does the recently approved guideline here have any bearance on wikipedia's use of the logo? MyNameIsNotBob 05:39, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

It really is very clear on the issue:
"Only official churches, organizations, and entities administered by organizations listed in the Seventh-day Adventist Yearbook are entitled to use the Seventh-day Adventist Church's corporate identity symbols (logo graphic and text) as described in the Church's corporate identity standards manual."
I suppose that means a direct end to "fair-use" on that front. :( Ansell 05:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I did email the relevant department prior to the publication of this guideline asking about the encyclopedia's use of the logo and they said it was okay, so I guess I might email again. MyNameIsNotBob 06:17, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

They should probably log an OTRS ticket by emailing permissions-en@wikimedia.org (someone correct me if that is wrong) relating to this so that there is official confirmation about it. Ansell 23:30, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe the real issue here regards groups claiming to represent the church. For a group to use the official church logo, you would of course expect some pretty strict guidelines. However the Wikipedia article(s) do not claim to represent the church - rather, they are a "critical" (in the academic sense of analytical) commentary of it. As I recall, "fair use" is all about critical commentary. --Colin MacLaurin 15:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I would agree with this assessment. My correspondence with the General Conference Public Relations Department points out that the guideline is specifically for the use by church organisations of the logo. MyNameIsNotBob 23:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Large scale reversion

Large scale reversions, such as this revert to remove a weeks worth of progress are not acceptable. Please develop the page. I reverted to the last version before the anon edits. Discuss changes in future. Ansell 03:37, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

This seemed to happen to the Ellen White page as well. I reverted it. --Colin MacLaurin 07:58, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Another image

There is another image of a church at Portuguese Seventh-day Adventist Church (Toronto). -Fermion 21:30, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notable Adventists

I am not convinced of the merits of a notable Adventists section. Indeed the current names are questionably Adventist. I suggest a list be created for these names. -Fermion 01:18, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Here is what was on the page. Fermion 10:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I've added them to List of Seventh-day Adventists. -Colin MacLaurin 12:18, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Also - don't forget Desmond_Doss (American WWII medic)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/e/v/Talk%7ESeventh-day_Adventist_Church_a53a.html"