Talk:The Fifth Epochal Revelation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Sources

I think the main reason this article has been plastered with clean-up tags is because it cites only primary sources. What is needed is multiple reliable third party sources demonstrating notability, and verifying the information provided.

It is okay to use primary sources for non controversial information, but an interpretation of the book needs to be from a previously published source. Good start. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 04:38, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it only needs a better introduction to what is an epochal revelation? I think at one time it WAS better... hm. 68.52.225.175 00:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)anonymous

[edit] Notability

Considering the current name of the article, the topic in its entirety can really be covered in a sentence:

"The Fifth Epochal Revelation" is an informal slang title for The Urantia Book used by some believers in the book.

If an idea is for the article to say that the Urantia book is a "Fifth Epochal Revelation" and develop in detail what is meant by epochal revelation, which to me isn't unreasonable in terms of notability, the article should be renamed as "Epochal revelation (The Urantia Book)" to reflect this as the focus of the article.

Although in that case, explanation would inevitably be needed to say what "epochal" means as opposed to non-epochal. A better new title for the article would be "Revelation (The Urantia Book)". The purpose of the article would be to explain what the book means by the term "revelation", and along the way, the term "Fifth Epochal Revelation" would be covered.

The title "The Fifth Epochal Revelation" ultimately should only be a redirect to the main Urantia article or one on what is meant by "revelation" in the book. Wazronk 23:29, 3 February 2007 (UTC)