Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lutheranism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To-do list for Wikipedia:WikiProject Lutheranism: edit · history · watch · refresh

WikiProject Lutheranism WikipediaWikiProject Lutheranism is part of WikiProject Lutheranism, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Lutheranism on Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to Lutheran churches, Lutheran theology and worship, and biographies of notable Lutherans. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the quality scale.
The current WikiProject Lutheranism Collaboration article is Augsburg Confession .
Help us improve the information about Lutheranism on Wikipedia.
CAST YOUR VOTE for the next collaboration
Shortcut:
WT:LUTHER

Contents

[edit] vote for Moses to become a featured article vote

Vote at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Moses so as too get Moses into a featured article Java7837 23:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome

The WikiProject Lutheranism is up and running. I went ahead and laid out the bare bones for a Project page, as well as some templates. I know it isn't all of the highest quality -- but it is to the best of my ability. If you see something on the Project pages that need tweaking, please jump right in. Our first tasks are (a) to add the Project banner to all relevant areticles, and (b) invite other interested editors to join up. Thanks, and I'm looking forward to some good work by this project. -- Pastordavid 20:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Looks Good!

Looks good, David! I'm going to spend most of the time trying to flag articles for us, just to get off to a good start. --CTSWyneken(talk) 10:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Do we want to flag articles with Lutheran sections?

There are a number of articles such as: Infant baptism, Law and Gospel, etc. that have Lutheran sections. Do we want to mark them? --CTSWyneken(talk) 10:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I would say that that is a sort of case by case question. Law & Gospel, I would say definitely. Infant Bapt ... maybe, what do others think? Some of these articles are only tangentially Lutheran - others are pretty obvious. I went ahead and tagged "Law & Gospel", but I passed over a couple of other concepts in the Category:Lutheranism that I thought weren't quite as specifically Lutheran (e.g., Atonement, Total Depravity). We can always ask here if not sure. -- Pastordavid 15:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Here's another question I think is of importance: do we want to flag biographies where the individual concerned is Lutheran but their significance is unrelated to the Lutheran Church. In particular, one of our GA articles is Karl Popper and, while he was certainly given a Lutheran education, he became an atheist as an adult. Is it acceptable to include him or should we remove him from the scope of the project since he is clearly not Lutheran, per se, nor is knowing his importance especially enhancing to understanding what Lutheranism is? The same question would go for Wernher von Braun, William Renquest, and a host of others. jackturner3 20:00, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

My thoughts (for what they are worth): If the person is a Lutheran, then yes - add them to Category:Lutherans and add the banner and rating. Thus, I know that Bill Renquest was a lifelong Lutheran, and a member of Redeemer (ELCA) Lutheran in Falls Church (Even taught adult Sunday School) - he belongs in that category, and with a banner (I would say mid importance - a committed Lutheran as Supreme Court justice has some importance). Karl Popper - if he became an atheist, probably not (I will go check the article), in which case he should be removed from the category as well. -- Pastordavid 20:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
UPDATE: removed banner, not a Lutheran ... no influence on Lutheranism. -- Pastordavid 20:12, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
As to the others ... John Calvin - not a Lutheran, but influenced Lutheran theology & history (especially as a defined in opposition). Von Braun, Euler, & Keppler were all Lutheran, and their articles clearly state so. Hilbert may have been, but the article doesn't say anything one way or the other - I haven't removed him from our list or the category yet, maybe we can get some clarification. -- Pastordavid 20:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Follow up question. What about articles in the Category:People celebrated in the Lutheran liturgical calendar? John Carter 21:13, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Response

Wow. 9 participants in under 24 hours -- I think it is safe to say that there is a need for this wikiproject. I just checked, an we have already tagged just under 300 articles (and there are plenty left that need banners). Once we get a significant number of those done, the next step will be assessing, and of course - article improvement. If folks would be interested in doing a regular collaboration, I would be happy to organize it -- Perhaps as a kick-off we could get Lutheranism up to GA. -- Pastordavid 17:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Shortcuts

You can now get to the WikiProject Lutheranism more quickly, by typing WP:LUTHER or WP:Lutheranism into the wikipedia search field and pressing enter or go. It's always nice to get where you're going more quickly. -- Pastordavid 21:07, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Separate Project?

Sorry for the question, but there have been several complaints from some editors regarding the recent proliferation of project banners on some talk pages. Would the members of this project like to see it remain an entirely separate entity, with its own banner, or perhaps try to integrate it into the Christianity WikiProject banner, like the various task forces of Military history and other projects have done? Using that method, the articles can still be assessed for each task force, but the banner is rather smaller. Anyway, just an idea. John Carter 13:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I think this would function better as a seperate WikiProject. 12 primary categories, plus associated sub-categories, seems to me to be a sizable enough workload for a project - and we seem to have garner enough interested editors. As to the proliferation of banners, many of the articles (maybe as much as 1/2, I didn't keep track) that I have tagged so far had no banners at all before I added ours. Many others only had one. I don't think that we are duplicating much work that has been done by others. But that is my opinion on the matter, I am certainly open to what others think. -- Pastordavid 20:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I also think it's important as there are issues which are specficially Lutheran vs. Protestant vs. Catholic. To roll each of these up into one project would not help clarify the issue with people who are coming to wiki to gather information. I do agree that merging the projects would make the management and editing of each document easier; but reductionism by itself isn't a good reason to do anything. TedTschopp 21:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Some articles, like Martin Luther, have a nesting feature that puts all the project banners into one. If someone is interested, they click and all of them display. --CTSWyneken(talk) 02:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
The only real substantial change in making it a task force would be the consolidation of the banner, and in the name of the article page. The group would probably even keep its own assessment criteria. At least, that's the way it works with some subprojects. Also, I think that Christianity might even welcome having a bit more activity, as many/most of its articles, covering Christianity in general, hadn't evidently been tagged yet. John Carter 20:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
John, I don't know that we fit into the current definition of a task force: "The major distinction between a task force and a fully independent child WikiProject—and, indeed, the reason why the task force model was developed—is that the task force minimizes the bureaucratic overhead of its activities by relying on the parent project to provide as much of the procedural and technical infrastructure as possible. " We do not use the resources/infrastructure of the parent project. As to the proposal in question, see my comments on the proposal talk page -- personally I think it is a flawed proposal.

[edit] Category Work

Going through and adding banners, I have noticed that Category:Lutheranism and its sub-categories need some work. Many articles are duplicated in both a parent- and a sub-category, and some of the category division seem to need a little touching up. I have added this task to our "to-do" under helping out on the main page. -- Pastordavid 20:54, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll go ahead and make that my next project. I've been a member of WP:CATP for a while, without any real dedication to it. This can reaffirm my dedication to both Wikiprojects. Fishal 03:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Sounds great. I've done some re-arranging, but haven't had the time to do some real work on it. -- Pastordavid 16:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I took a stab at it this evening. I created Category:Book of Concord and Category:Lutheran organizations, while combining Category:Lutheran universities and colleges and Category:Lutheran schools into Category:Lutheran education.
I also began finished working on sorting the various articles in Category:Lutheranism into more useful subcategories. I think I might create a Category:Lutheran texts and Category:Luther's works to help sort some of those articles about documents. Fishal 01:01, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I also want to turn Category:Lutheranism by region into a useful category which encompasses most of the articles in the Lutheranism category. I also want to cross-categorize it with Category:Lutherans by nationality, so that Category:American Lutherans, for example, would be a part of Category:Lutheranism in North America. Fishal 12:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I created Category:Lutheran hymnwriters. (Terot 14:19, 4 May 2007 (UTC))

Regarding the Methodism section, at the end there's a statement about partaking in a "worthy manner." This is concept is not strong for Methodists. I think a better statement would regard Methodist's understanding of the sacrament being an "open table." Methodists understand that communion is God's gift to humanity received by faith. None of us are worthy, adult or child alike. It's about grace. Additionally, As “the regularly-repeated celebration of communion of the body of Christ,” the Lord’s Supper nourishes Christians as he/she is “repeatedly touched by divine grace…progressively shaped into Christ’s image” through “a lifelong process.” (This Holy Mystery) This shaping is a real spiritual perfecting benefit. (O Thou who this mysterious bread, Verse 4. From Charles Wesley’s Hymns upon the Lord’s Supper.)--I don't know how to make these edits, so it's up to y'all.65.66.227.183 (talk) 22:22, 27 November 2007 (UTC)Michael Mumme

[edit] Assessment Issues

I have started a discussion about issues relating to assessment -- especially importance. -- Pastordavid 16:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Saint of the day

A proposal has been made on the talk page of the Portal:Saints for a possible daily update to at least some of the content of the portal. I think that this is a fine idea, but also think that I would want input from others as to which content to feature on which date. I have therefore set up a page for such discussion at Portal:Saints/Saint of the day for interested parties to nominate content related to individual saints they would like to see featured on the portal, and one which particular day, if one is preferred. I am here thinking particularly about possibly including individuals on the days of their feasts, if they have one. Any member of this project is more than welcome to make any nominations they see fit. Please feel free to make any specific suggestions there. John Carter 20:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Update

The "to do" list on the project page has been updated to reflect the fact that all articles that currently have the Lutheranism banner have been rated for class and improvement. Quite an achievement - but we all know how task-oriented and hard working German Lutherans are! Many people helped out with the task - but user:jackturner3 has especially put some time in on this one.

Now on to article improvement -- we have far too few GAs and FAs for important articles. -- Pastordavid 20:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm currently working on improving the Seminary articles, along with Apostlemep12. He has taken LTSP & LTSG and I am taking all the rest. I have already added infoboxes to all the articles, but anyone who knows something about the institutions is welcome to help us.
jackturner3 13:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Awards

Many Wikiprojects give out awards for outstanding contributions. WikiProject Philosophy, for example, has the Star of Sophia. Should we start our own award here? I think that the "Indulgence" given by Ptmccain toCTSWyneken was pretty clever. Fishal 19:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

If you think we need/that it would be good for us to have our own award, you could always develop it and submit it as an Award Proposal and hopefully get approval. Maybe the standard Wikipedia barnstar with a Luther Rose in the center?
jackturner3 13:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
I would support either the indulgence or a modified "Lutheran barnstar" of some sort. I don't, however, have the skill to design one. Anyone care to take a stab at it? -- Pastordavid 02:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I support the idea as well, but "incompetent" doesn't begin to describe my own shortcomings in this regard. John Carter 14:38, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I guess since I'm the one who thought of it, I should take a stab at it, eh?
jackturner3 14:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I have roped in some help from someone who has designed other barnstars. Hopefully we can come up with something relatively soon. I'll keep y'all updated as soon as I have more info. Pastor David † (Review) 22:25, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

See the Proposals below. Pastor David † (Review) 17:51, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article list

I am in the process of starting a list of the articles that this project deals with so that the recent changes function can be used on it. I would however need to know if there are any articles in the Category:Lutheranism or its subcategories which are not thought to be in the scope of the project. Please inform me if any such articles exist. Thank you. John Carter 14:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest using Category:WikiProject Lutheranism articles instead, just in case. This brings up the talk pages, but if you are using AWB to create the list you can convert them from talk pages to articles. Actually ... hang on and I will make a list for you. Leave me a note where you would like it posted. -- Pastordavid 15:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. I have already started the Wikipedia:WikiProject Lutheranism/Articles page, and can change the makeup easily to accomodate the one category. John Carter 15:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
The article list is uunneecceessaarryy (I forget which letters are doubled here, so I played it safe) with the category, so I added the recent changes function to the project page. John Carter 16:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
As to the list ... I just did a pass through and found another 57 articles in need of tagging (went ahead and added banner and ratings). I will hold off until I can work through a few more cats to double check. -- Pastordavid 16:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
What a great idea! I just checked out the link you added. One question: right now, it appears to only have the talk pages (at least the last 500 edits). Will this always be the case, because the category lists the talk pages? Or is there a way to switch it to the articles themselves? -- Pastordavid 16:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, yes. Like I said, I never used the Project article list before; now I know why. The net is acting up right now, but I'll add the articles in the category to the project's Articles list and then it should show both the article and talk page changes. John Carter 17:38, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
The article page is now up. I'll change the recent changes link to it now. John Carter 18:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Pastordavid, you have just informed the editors of the Leni Riefenstahl article that "Leni Riefenstahl is part of WikiProject Lutheranism, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Lutheranism on Wikipedia".
Riefenstahl was a famous film director with a profound influence on film aesthetics and controversial for her Nazi propaganda works.
But I wasn't aware that she was a also prominent figure for Lutheranism (the article Lutheranism doesn't mention her so far). Could you explain her influence on Lutheranism a bit (did she produce any religious films, too?) and what kind of work the WikiProject Lutheranism is planning for the Leni Riefenstahl article?
Regards, High on a tree 01:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Notable Lutheran?
Notable Lutheran?
P.S.: I'm equally curious about your reasons to incorporate former Playboy model Elke Sommer into this WikiProject. Regards, High on a tree 02:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Maybe I'm speaking out of turn for someone else, but this would be my guess. These individuals are both included in the Category:German Lutherans. Whoever placed the articles in those categories presumably did so for some reason, and we in this project have added all the articles in the Category:Lutheranism and its subcategories as being at least somewhat within the scope of this project. Not all these individuals will necessarily be of top importance to the project, although, in several cases, they may have some importance. Also, both those articles are now on the project's article list which I made out, so that we can monitor them for vandalism, improvement, and so on. I wish to make it clear that as active members of both this project and Wikipedia:WikiProject Saints, both User:Pastordavid and I (I can't speak for anyone else) do our level best to improve articles in a general, rather than a specifically partisan, manner, so I do not think that there will be any POV-pushing regarding Lutheranism-related content in these articles from either of us. However, it is certainly possible that if there is any specifically meaningful content relating to their faiths for either of these individuals, or any others in the project's scope, we'd probably be the ones who would find it first. It is also possible that other members of this project may seek to improve the articles based on the subjects being Lutherans, as such commonality is a common reason for people to edit articles. Regarding the subject of lists, lists tend to be made after review of articles, and, as just noted, these articles were just included to the project, and haven't necessarily been reviewed for inclusion in lists yet. Such lists tend to require sourcing for inclusion in any event, so they may not be made anytime soon. Also, for what it's worth, I'm actually a Catholic and a member of this project, and I will try to ensure that any unbalanced representation of Lutheranism in any of the articles this project has tagged will be called to attention. However, my experience with Pastordavid is that he is, if anything, even more critical about undue weight in articles to religious content than I am. Again, as stated above, the articles are now being monitored by at least some members of this project for vandalism and improvement, and we shall at the very least help ensure that they are not unconstructively edited. I hope that answers your questions. Lastly, I notice that the Elke Sommer article wasn't even assessed until now, so that is at least one obvious improvement already. John Carter 15:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
John Carter is absolutely correct. I added the banner based on the articles' inclusion in the category:german lutherans. I did notice as I went through that one or two of the Lutherans by nationality categories seemed a little random, and skipped some as I went through. However, I also saw a need to re-assess whether some folks should be in that category, and was planning on making a pass through later today. I did not want to do so until I also had the time to leave talk page notes, as I would be removing people from a category, and I wanted to inform editors watching those articles why I did so.
That said, it is a false assumption that everyone tagged with the Lutheranism banner would be included in the article Lutheranism. Just as everyone who is in Category:American people and its sub-cats is not mentioned in the article United States. -- Pastordavid 15:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Categorization

I think a lot of figures who may well have been Lutherans may not be categorized as such yet, Michael Maier and Johannes Valentinus Andreae among them. Should we categorize those parties whose Lutheranism is included in the text of their biographies or not? John Carter 21:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Lutheran bodies

I have some data about some new Lutheran missions and national churches in my region planted within the last decade which are currently still not part of any international Lutheran bodies like the LWF, ILC or CELC. They would include these bodies in Burma/Myanmar:

  • Myanmar Lutheran Church (LCMS related)
  • Lutheran Church of Myanmar (former Baptists?!)
  • National Lutheran Church in Myanmar (LC-MS related)

Perhaps a clean up of the category might be helpful to make sure future articles on new Lutheran bodies be properly linked with others, especially in view of the renewed vigour in which some Lutheran churches are engaging in mission and church planting nowadays. - Bob K

Having dug a bit further, I came across this conversation between User:Pastordavid and User:Ep9206. Looks like I'll go ahead with the articles and just categorise them directly under. -- Bob K 08:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Collaboration (1)

The Lutheranism article improvement / collaboration project is now ready to go. I thought about adding the template to everyone's talk page, but thought that might be a little spammy. Instead, I will draw your attention to the collaboration template at the top of this page and on the main project page. You can add this to your User page or Talk page by adding {{Lutheran COTM}}. While you're at it, check out the collaboration page, where there are ideas for improving the current collaboration, and a place to make suggestions for the next collaboration. -- Pastordavid 02:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Contrition

This article currently has a very Roman POV, and we don't come out looking too good -- in fact, it is a pretty bad misrepresentation of the Lutheran understanding of contrition, I think. Anyone want to take a stab at balancing this article out some? -- Pastordavid 17:28, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

We could put an NPOV flag on it... --CTSWyneken(talk) 17:30, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
So flagged. -- Pastordavid 18:30, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed Barnstars

Resolved. per the straw poll below. Pastordavid 17:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Following this discussion, the Barnstar approved here by general consensus has been added to the main project page. Pastordavid 21:46, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

It's been quite a few months since we all agreed on this piece of wikilove, and yet, to date, only one person has actually been awarded one. Do we need to develop some sort of criteria for earning the award so that we can actually begin giving it out, or should we just appoint a member of the project to had out the award for exemplarly service? For that matter, if there are so few activities that actually merit a barnstar, do we even need it at all? I'm just wondering what everyone else thinks. -- jackturner3 (talk) 21:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Luther article delisted as good article

Your comments are appreciated on the talk page there. --CTSWyneken(talk) 23:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New project proposal

There is a new WikiProject task force proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Inter-religious content that is being proposed to deal specifically with articles whose content relates to several religious traditions. Any editors interested in joining such a group would be more than welcome to indicate their interest there. John Carter 15:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Collaboration (2)

This month's collaboration is A Mighty Fortress is our God (if you have the template on your talk or user page, it should automatically update). Let's see if we can get this up to GA! If you have ideas for next month's collaboration, leave a note on the Project's Collaboration page. Hope everyone's preparations for Pentecost are going well. Pastordavid 15:23, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Also on the Collaboration page is a to-do list for the current collaboration. On the collaboration talk page there is information about the previous collaboration. Pastordavid 15:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikisource

I noticed that Wikisource has few to no Lutheran documents. A good {{Wikisource}} tag would enhance the articles about documents in Lutheran history, particularly Book of Concord-related articles, all of which are labeled as Top-Importance. Would it be possible to simply transfer content from Project Wittenberg to Wikisource? Fishal 13:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

In most cases, yes. Or you could link to them directly, whichever is easier. --CTSWyneken(talk) 16:32, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Lutheran Section of Salvation article

I think there should be a Lutheran section of the Salvation article. I'm just laying this out there in case anyone wants to start it. How should it be different from the Lutheran section of the Justification article? Would it be wrong to copy and paste on onto the other?--Epiphyllumlover 03:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Samuel Simon Schmucker

The main article of Samuel Simon Schmucker has huge NPOV pro-Schmuckerite/pro-union/pro-generic American Protestantism issues. I am requesting a Confessional Lutheran to look over and alter it. I added an "Objections" section, but that needs to be smoothed out and probably merged into the main article. Also, the S.S.S. article should be delisted from the category "Lutheran theologians" and be added to some other appropriate category, since he was not a Lutheran. What are your opinions on this? Thanks, --Epiphyllumlover 05:24, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

While I agree that the SSS article has NPOV issues, I would disagree about removing him from the "Lutheran X" categories. Certainly post-1860 his theology veered outside of mainstream Lutheranism, but there was a forty year career as a Lutheran theologian prior to that, which included founding the 1st Lutheran seminary on American soil. The answer, to me, would be to represent how Schmucker's radical post-1860 position was received within his own tradition (The theologian reaction of Charles Porterfield Krauth of Gettysburg, the founding of Philadelphia Seminary, and the split between the General Council and the General Synod - which was not healed until the formation of the ULCA in 1919). Pastordavid 14:15, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I think the article on Schmucker should stay in the "Lutheran X" categories. While I don't like his theology, and while some would not consider him to be a "confessional Lutheran" I disagree with Epiphyllumlover's opinion that he was not a Lutheran. He may not have been a "confessional Lutheran" as that term is defined by the LSMC, WELS, and the ELS among others, but he was a Lutheran, and an important figure in Lutheran History. - Gladfelteri 10:11, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notice

One of the articles in the scope of our project is a featured list candidate. Please express your opinion. Pastordavid 17:36, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

This article previously failed FA review becuase of lack of consensus (only three votes in favor, four requied, no objections). If you are interested, plase go to the above page and express your support of or constructive critique for this article. -- jackturner3 14:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History of Norwegian-American Lutheran church

I am about to start an article on the Norwegian-American Lutheran church, from its beginnings in the early 19th century to its - presumed - assimiliation with other Lutheran denominations. Please let me know if there are any articles I should use as a model. My interest is primarily in the history of Norwegian-American immigration than Lutheran theology (though I have written much of State Church of Norway). --Leifern 16:25, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The Norwegian Lutherans in America started in a number of small churches: The Norwegian Synod, the United Norwegian Lutheran Church of America, the Norwegian-Danish Conference, the Norwegian-Augustana Synod, Eislen's Synod, Hauge's Synod. Most Norwegian churches merged into the Evangelical Lutheran Church (formed 1917) which became a part of the American Lutheran Church. I'm not sure how to do an "overview" article of them all without doing individual articles on the individual church bodies. The United Evangelical Lutheran Church is an example of such an article on an individual church body. Pastordavid 16:45, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
The interesting bit about the history is how the Norwegian-Americans developed their own church history increasingly independently of the church in Norway, first as independent congregrations, then increasingly organized on their own, and of course, how they split into various synods and conferences before being assimilated into the synods you mention. --Leifern 18:30, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
It has been started, with quite a few sections left to go, here The Norwegian Lutheran Church in the United States. --Leifern 00:08, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Release version articles

Hello all.
You may or may not be aware that there is on-going work for published release versions of wikipedia (see WP:1.0). I have jumped in to help with this project, in particular helping to hand select articles that might not otherwise get picked up by a bot.

The following articles from our project caught my eye as being important for any static release:

The reason a bot would not automatically select them is because of issues with their quality. If no one objects, I will nominate them anyway, and see if we can get them included. But any work that people might do to improve their quality in the meantime would certainly be helpful. Pastordavid 18:03, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Important info

We have four articles currently in the process of seeking status as recognized content.

  1. Calendar of Saints (Lutheran) is up as a featured list candidate, and comments would be greatly appreciated.
  2. Liturgical calendar (Lutheran)‎ is currently a Good Article candidate, see the article's talk page for more info.
  3. Pennsylvania Ministerium is currently a Good Article candidate, see the article's talk page for more info.
  4. This last one is tangentially related to our project. Bishop Henry is an important figure in the Finnish and Swedish traditions, and he is commemorated on January 19 on the calendar of the ELCA. The article for Bishop Henry is currently a featured article candidate, and your comments would be appreciated.

Thanks all! Happy editing. 16:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AFD Notice

Please note the AfD listing for List of films about Martin Luther. Pastordavid 15:27, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What "stories" of the Bible merit separate articles?

There has recently been some discussion regarding which "stories" or portions of the Bible merit having their own articles. For the purposes of centralized discussion, please make any comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Bible#What should have separate articles?. Thank you. John Carter 13:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Friedrich Nietzsche

The article Friedrich Nietzsche does not belong in the Project based on the criteria decided upon during the initial assessment phase, which can be reviewed under the section on this talk page entitled Do we want to flag articles with Lutheran sections?. In summation, those who convert from Lutheranism to another confession (such as atheism) do not fall under the project's concern and therefore should not recieve a project banner. -- jackturner3 21:09, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

No real disagreement in general, but I can reasonably think that there might be some specific exceptions in certain circumstances. Like, for instance, if the person converted from Lutheranism well after the period of their optimum notability, but was a Lutheran during that period of optimum notability. I don't know if that's the case here, though. John Carter 21:15, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Insofar as I can discern, Nietzsche was born to a Lutheran family, but became an atheist during his university studies. His notability is largely due to his philosophical writings, which come after his conversion. For that reason, I don't think he should be included, though I can agree with having a person included in the project who was a Lutheran during thier period of notability or is otherwise significant impact, positive or negative, on the history of Lutheranism (like John Calvin, for example). I don't think Nietzsche meets either qualification. -- jackturner3 13:38, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Fair answer. Like I said, I'm not sure the specific circumstances I mentioned applied here. If the subject were to be included in one of the Lutheran lists, I could see how he might be included, but this individual doesn't seem to be likely to be included in them, so that's probably an irrelevant issue. John Carter 15:49, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Nietzche - he was a 'lutheran' however I question his works. Similar to Marx, I just don;t see him having any theological merit - maybe for the secular scholar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thright (talk • contribs) 23:14, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Collaboration (3)

How long do these collaborations last? It seems Book of Concord has been listed forever. Is there any more work to be done, or is it time to move on? Arch O. La Grigory Deepdelver 16:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it may be time to change. I plan to pick an article from the proposal list, if nobody else does it... Awolf002 18:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, that would be my fault. I have been away from WP for quite some time due to events in my life, and am only minimally back now. I see you figured out how to change it - simply change the artcle name in Template:Lutheran collaboration article. I think switching it out once a month or so should be about right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pastordavid (talk • contribs) 21:34, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Nice to hear from you again. Once a month seems to me a good period, however, Martin Luther needs quite some help. Maybe we can keep it until the end of November... Awolf002 21:39, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Sounds good to me (have a really been on a long enough break that I forgot to sign that last comment? Jeez..). Pastordavid 21:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland - rewrite

As the article on Finnish Orthodox Church was much improved, I became ashamed of how bad the article of my own church was. I have now rewritten large portions of the article. As the article falls under the project, I ask you to read it and to make further edits. --MPorciusCato 11:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

You've done good work. Thank you. I added the Finland project banner too. Maybe they can offer some help as well. John Carter 21:56, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Divine Providence

I added a "Lutheran Theology" section to the Divine Providence article. If you want to, look over it to makes sure it is all right, smooth it over, add additional stuff, and that sort of thing. --Epiphyllumlover 03:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Userboxes

For what it's worth, I have just made an High Church Lutheranism userbox for them who possibly would like to use it. (Terot (talk) 19:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC))

Code Result Users
{{User:Terot/Userbox/Evangelical Catholic Lutheran}}
This user is an Evangelical Catholic adherent of Lutheran Christianity.
Transclusions

[edit] Your assessments

I am not involved in your project, but have noticed a couple of rather odd assessments of Swedish topics. I just changed Olaus Petri from low-importance to high-importance; he was the main figure (or, with a less "heroic" approach to history, at least one of the two-three main figures) of the Swedish reformation. On the other hand, you have assessed Ingrid Bergman as "mid-importance". Why? She was presumably nominally Lutheran, as most other Swedes have been since the Reformation, but if you want your assessments to give any meaningful guidance to topics that will be of interest to members of your project to collaborate or work on, I would suggest removing your project notice from her talk page completely. Olaus (talk) 21:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] "Lutheran-Reformed Church"

I am not sure if I am posting in the right place here, but as the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutheran-Reformed_Church has been rated a stub within the project "Lutheranism" I'll just try. I wrote a comment on the talk page of that article but as I am not sure anyone will ever look in there, I'd just like to point this out here. This article, in my opinion, is so full of mistakes (at least as far as the German church is concerned) that I am not even sure it's worth saving. As a native German speaker I cannot decide if "Lutheran-Reformed Church" is a term that is commonly being used in actual spoken English; in German we certainly don't use any comparable term but call it "united church" (unierte Kirche). I have been wondering if merging this article with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_church might not make more sense. Anna (talk) 23:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I think that merger is probably the best solution here. I will take care of that a little bit later tonight. Cheers. Pastordavid (talk) 23:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Wow, you are really fast here! I'm impressed! Anna (talk) 23:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Next collaboration looming

I think we should switch to another collaboration article by the end of this month. Not much work was done on Martin Luther in the last weeks, I think. Which article from the list should we select? Vote now! ;-) Awolf002 (talk) 23:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Last call to vote. New collaboration should start, soon. Awolf002 (talk) 13:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I used the top article Augsburg Confession. Happy editing! Awolf002 (talk) 23:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Possible Lutheran "saint" collaboration

For the purposes of centralized discussion, please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Saints#Multiple saints collaborations?. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 15:08, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] All Saints' Church, Wittenberg, Germany

Hello, I am the creator of the above page. All Saints' Church, also known as Schlosskirche, is the place where Lutheranism, and all of Protestantism began. It's also the place where Luther and Melanchthon are buried. It's history is intimately tied with Lutheranism, since it is the place where the 95 theses were posted. I need some help on it, however: first of all, I need a rating from your project, and most likely from several others. Secondly, the article could be extremely improved if someone manages to translate the German version of the page, found at "Schlosskirche, Wittenberg" on the German Wikipedia. Perhaps, if that page is translated and a good deal of information added, then All Saints' might be able to become a GA or FA! There are plenty of pictures, and I will begin moving those from the German page now, but if you could help me by assessing the page and searching for someone to translate the German, I would be eternally grateful. Thanks, Benjamin Scrīptum est - Fecī 18:45, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FA Candidate Notice

Liturgical calendar (Lutheran), an article within the scope of our project, is now a Featured Articel Candidate. Please express your opinion. -- jackturner3 (talk) 19:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding project banner

I have noted how several articles relevant to Christianity have only the banner of more focused projects, several Christianity banners, or no banners at all on the talk pages. This makes it rather difficult for the Christianity WikiProject to keep track of all articles, as well as potentially reducing the number of editors who might be willing to work on the article, if only the more focused banner is in place. If I were to adjust the existing {{ChristianityWikiProject}} to include separate individual assessment information for each relevant Christianity project, and display the projects which deal with it, like perhaps the {{WikiProject Australia}} does, would the members of this project object to having that banner ulimately used in place of this project's one? It might help reduce the banner clutter, as well. John Carter (talk) 18:16, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Oppose I would like to keep our seperate project banner. Ultimately, every artcile in our project could be described as a part of Wikiproject:Christianity, thus necessitating the removal of all of our project banners. In short, that would mean we would be reduced to little more than a task force of project Chrisitanity. Additionally, I don't think clutter is much of a problem anymore now that we are supposed to be nesting project banners for articles that fall in the scope of multiple projects. I would rather keep the seperate project and simply add the Christianity banner ahead of the Lutheranism banner to the most important articles on the project. How do other related Wikiprojects feel about this idea? -- jackturner3 (talk) 18:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Oppose - in agreement with Jackturner3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thright (talk • contribs) 23:16, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Paul Tillich

This needs more editors. The theological sections are descending into a state incomprehensible to the general reader. 86.142.255.208 (talk) 00:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ELCIC

Can I get a hand over at Talk:Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada? Two accounts created today, apparently by the same person, have started a crusade to eliminate any reference to controversy over the blessing of same-sex unions on the grounds that is in inherently "biased" since the church has "made up its mind" about the issue. I have placed a sockpuppet suspicion template on one of the user pages, which s/he/it keeps removing. The user(s) is/are quite prepared to make vandalising, POV, and soapbox edits, while nailing me for the very same offences when I try to counteract them. Carolynparrishfan (talk) 23:35, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

this is simply not true. Please see the ELCIC talk page. Also see Carolyn's talk page as she has had this problem with MANY users.Thright (talk) 23:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC)thright
By "many users", Thright means that there is one exchange on my talk page relating to a minor disagreement about how to address the question of same-sex unions (also from an editor who thought it "inappropriate" to mention the issue at all). I hardly cherry-pick. Indeed, most of my edits deal with liturgical matters. (I was the original author of Evangelical Lutheran Worship, for example). Carolynparrishfan (talk) 23:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
can you please stop this childish debateThright (talk) 23:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)thright

Well, since no one's bothered to intervene here, I've started a request for comment. Carolynparrishfan (talk) 01:07, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Coordinators for the Christianity projects

I have recently started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity#Coordinators? regarding the possibility of the various Christianity projects somewhat integrating, in the style of the Military history project, for the purposes of providing better coordination of project activities. Any parties interested in the idea, or perhaps willing to offer their services as one of the potential coordinators, is more than welcome to make any comments there. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 20:58, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Coordinator?

It has probably been noticed by most of the editors who frequent this page that there is often a pronounced degree of overlap between the various projects relating to Christianity. Given that overlap, and the rather large amount of content we have related to the subject of Christianity, it has been proposed that the various Christianity projects select a group of coordinators who would help ensure the cooperation of the various projects as well as help manage some project related activities, such as review, assessment, portal management, and the like. Preferably, we would like to consider the possibility of having one party from each of the major Christianity projects included, given the degree of specialization which some of the articles contain. We now are accepting nominations for the coordinators positions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Coordinators/Election 1. Any parties interested in helping performing some of the management duties of the various Christianity projects is encouraged to nominate themselves there. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 17:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Much to my surprise, the period for the factual elections of the new coordinators has started a bit earlier than I expected. For what it's worth, as the "instigator" of the proposed coordinators, the purpose of having them is not to try to impose any sort of "discipline" on the various projects relating to Christianity, but just to ensure that things like assessment, peer review, portal maintainance, and other similar directly project-related functions get peformed for all the various projects relating to Christianity. If there are any individuals with this project who are already doing such activities for the project, and who want to take on the role more formally, I think nominations are being held open until the end of the elections themselves. And, for the purposes of this election, any member in good standing of any of the Christianity projects can either be nominated or express their votes at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Coordinators/Election 1. Thank you for your attention. John Carter (talk) 00:38, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Christian debate on persecution and toleration and related topics

Two days ago I had added a short paragraph to the article Christianity giving an overview about the Christian debate on persecution and toleration, the article on which I am currently working. This was removed by another editor, who was of the opinion that one should describe the actions of the Inquisition as "Prosecution" instead of "Persecution" and that I would need a source for a new paragraph. Well, I really hope that we don't need to resort to heated debates about wp:NPOV and wp:verifiability here; It is only fair to debate the topic and it doesn't really hurt: If happened some hundred years ago and is nowadays totally rejected by all Christians (according to the historian Coffey, whom I have quoted in the article). And if no one works on the topic from an enlightened Christian perspective, the Neopagans will just continue working on it from their perspective; since the details here are really difficult, this might result in somehow biased articles, even with good-faith-editing. So, if you have the time check out articles like Persecution of religion in ancient Rome and see if you can help there. Regards, Zara1709 (talk) 22:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

As the editor in question, I thought I would provide a response to this comment. I admit that I didn't take a close look at the edits that were made, and I thus apologize for my reaction. The paragraph in question seems sound, though I find that the last sentence makes too far a leap into the future to be totally congruous with that section of the article. I would also note that even something that is considered "prominent" or "well-known" historically needs to be referenced, especially if there is any controversy concerning the subject-matter. Nautical Mongoose (talk) 00:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Martin Luther's views on Mary

Needs serious work. Neddyseagoon - talk 11:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] THeology workgroup

The proposed theology workgroup of Wikiproject Christianity is now online, here. Any suggestions, improvements, and ideas are more than welcome - as are interested editors. Pastordavid (talk) 19:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Standards for inclusion in this project

I am questioning some of the articles that are being included in this project. Example David Hasselhoff which states Although Hasselhoff was raised Roman Catholic, he and his family attended non-denominational church services. Where is the Lutheran connection? I deleted the project tag from the article. Dbiel (Talk) 19:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Should artilces like Dick Bremer be part of this project? Dbiel (Talk) 19:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Even articles like Dr. Seuss I am finding it difficult to locate any Lutheran connection in the article other that the project tag. Dbiel (Talk) 19:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)