WikiChristian:Village pump
| Archives
|
|---|
|
This page is the main discussion forum for WikiChristian. Please bring up any technical or organizational topics here. See also: Help:Contents page.
|
Contents
Anonymous edits?
Vandalism seems to be on the decrease at WikiChristian. I wonder if now is a good time to re-allow anonymous edits. Any opinions? Plus, if we decide to do that, how do we do it? --Graham 07:13, 17 October 2008 (PDT)
- It's a server-side. If it's the consensus, I can do it in two seconds. --Aquatiki 23:00, 17 October 2008 (PDT)
- Well, let's wait and see if anyone else comments. KW is the only other user who tends to work on WikiChristian daily. The users, India, PB Pilhet and Theologian seem to stop by on around a weekly basis. Prab of course drops in a sorts out problems from time to time. I reckon we wait a couple more days, and if no one else comments, and you're agreeable, go ahead and make the change. And if vandalism seems to rear its ugly head again, then we'll go back to the current system quick-smart. Thanks. --Graham 23:10, 17 October 2008 (PDT)
Users Who Vandalize WikiChristian
Around Christmas time 2008 we had a few registered users vandalize certain pages on WikiChristian and post inappropriate photos. Should we screen those who create logins and find out their intentions before we let them create a login? Some people create logins on wikis for the purpose of vandalizing the site. Wikipedia has a number of suggestions to help deal with vandals. --DavidSpencer.ca 23:46, 28 December 2008 (PST)
- Some people want to be destructive and are willing to give their real name, email and more just to get at Christians. The more steps we put in their way, the more we're putting in the way of regular people who might want to contribute. Extra evil people will always exist and the steps we've taken preclude 99% of anonymous spam without inconveniencing human beings at all. I think we do almost enough as is. The guideline, however, which appear on the "block" page are ludicrously weak and don't take into account zombie computers or malicious sexual predators: they should be strengthened. --Aquatiki 23:55, 28 December 2008 (PST)
Technical submissions
How does one upgrade constructive technical data? For example, at least the following should be placed in the Koine Greek section under 'diphthongs-ei : * '
- * Most introductory grammars of NT Greek incorrectly link ει to η. However, phonologists and historians of the Greek language are unanimous that ει was joined in sound to ι before the beginning of the NT era. This is also acknowledged by NT reference grammars like Moulton-Howard-Turner, AT Robertson, and Blass-Debrunner-Funk. This is visible everywhere in old documents, in papyri, in inscriptions, and in all manuscripts of the Greek New Testament. For example, the name Πιλατος was spelled Πειλατος in Westcott-Hort's Greek NT because it is most commonly spelled that way in ancient NT manuscripts. For a linguistically up-to-date survey of Greek sounds in the NT era, see http://www.biblicalulpan.org/pages/Common/Greek%20Pronunciation%20(2008).pdf
- I can appreciate that there is some debate among scholars about the finer points of ancient Greek and Hebrew pronunciation. However, this is a general, Christian wiki and not a specific platform for linguistic scholarship. We are content to go with the majority of textbooks on this issue and are not looking to side with any minority in on-going debates. There is more than enough work to do here in terms of defining words and listing basic, grammatical details without quibbling over the minutiae of one camp over against another. Also, please wait for a response in this (or any other forum) before getting into a revert war with an administrator. --Aquatiki 12:58, 1 February 2009 (PST)
- Thank you for the clarification and at least leaving this note in the discussion. My notes were listed because I thought this wiki was to be a window to general reliability. My second attempt was trying to find a compromise that would at least provide an option for accurate information for visitors, even if only in a footnote. As mentioned, there isn't debate on the facts, only whether to expose students to them. No reputable Greek phonologist would argue that ει was pronounced like English 'ei'/'neighbour' in the first century, but they recognize its linkage to ι. See Teodorsson, Allen, Gignac, Horrocks, Bubenick, in addition to Moulton, Robertson, Funk listed above, et al. I can understand Koine pedagogues not following what is known, but to call a consensus a 'minority' is strange and confirms its need. And both Classical and Koine pedagogues agree on German ue for υ-ψιλον. On your Hebrew notes, likewise, `ayin is not a glottal stop, though it may be difficult for Europeans to pronounce. It is a preferred way of reading the Hebrew Bible in synagogues the world over and is featured on Israeli television and radio everyday. A Christian wiki would want to reconnect a coming generation to the languages of scripture as much as possible and open up paths for them to advance to what can be achieved. It would be nice to hear Christian students fluently reading Hebrew scriptures, with understanding, in a way that would be respected in Israel. At least to dream about it. The wiki can inform the audience that there are levels of aspiration far beyond the wiki.--Koinedoctor 20:31, 1 February 2009 (PST)
- Of the dozens of editors who have come (and gone) of this wiki, you are the second to have even studied Greek and Hebrew at any level beyond passing. I merely suggest that this wiki reflect the overwhelming majority of university level education in the English-speaking world. Someone who practiced what you preach would need to be educated not merely in the specific you list, but also in the scholarship to defend them. Since we are not primarily interested in creating a Phonetics-Apologetics site, I deem it wisest to maintain the status-quo, however sub-par-excellence that may be. --Aquatiki 01:09, 2 February 2009 (PST)
- If the status-quo led to levels where the student could think and rapidly communicate in Hebrew and Greek I would be with you. מה היה קורה אם עשינו את דיוננו בעברית - η - τι αν συνεβη ει διελογιζομεθα εν Ελληνικη ?--Koinedoctor 08:36, 2 February 2009 (PST)
- OK, your Greek and Hebrew are amazing. You win the award and we all owe you bragging rights and the place of honor. --End Sarcasm-- THIS IS NOT A SITE TO LEARN, let alone "rapidly communicate in Greek or Hebrew". No one is coming here to learn a language. People who already know Greek and/or Hebrew would be stupid to come here for a resource. It is quite possible that you know more than anybody else, but this is not the site for it. This is a general, Christian wiki. Please consider each of those terms carefully. Consider your audience and who traffics this site. THINK ABOUT IT for a minute. Ugh. --Aquatiki 10:58, 2 February 2009 (PST)
- If the status-quo led to levels where the student could think and rapidly communicate in Hebrew and Greek I would be with you. מה היה קורה אם עשינו את דיוננו בעברית - η - τι αν συνεβη ει διελογιζομεθα εν Ελληνικη ?--Koinedoctor 08:36, 2 February 2009 (PST)
Hello. I'm not much of Greek scholar, and unfortunately I don't know any Hebrew, so the argument above has been lost on me. Although I don't understand the argument I can see that there is too much emotion in the argument and I'd like to propose we add a little bit of grace into this discussion. If User:Koinedoctor feels that there are further notes about the alphabet that would be helpful, then why not create a page like Koine Greek: Alphabet - Further Details or something similar. How does that sound? Although I would probably be hard pressed to easily translate the words of Peter, luckily someone has already translated them into English for me - 1 Peter 4:7-9 - The end of all things is near. Therefore be clear minded and self-controlled so that you can pray. Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins. Offer hospitality to one another without grumbling. Cheers. --Graham 12:45, 3 February 2009 (PST)
- A nice verse, and I would hope that both Aquatiki and Koinedoctor are both appreciatively covered. Well, my primary purpose is to encourage Christian youth interested in biblical studies to go for gold. They are dedicating their lives to a Greek literature, yes God's Word, and a Hebrew literature, fully God's Word. They might only find out after a PhD that the language side of the 'gold' that they imagined needs a special track beyond what was in the status quo. (PS: I've only met a couple of Biblical Hebrew professors who became fluent in Hebrew after their PhD--out of more than a thousand.) - - For Hebrew, one could add a note that some of these sounds are different from any European language though they are still partially in use in Israel. If they wish to internalize the language and think in it, they will want to pick up those sounds, too. On Greek, one can note that historically speaking, the Greek language after Alexander the Great went through changes, including major changes in pronunciation, that are different 'from the above'. The changes affected the spelling of all of our manuscripts of the New Testament and presumably the writers. The Greek of New Testament times was already 75-80% along the way toward modern pronunciation. - Notes like these would be enough to plant a seed for whoever has the ears or calling from the Lord. It is what I would want of a Christian site and what I would hope to find if I were a teenager or young adult who landed here. --Koinedoctor 17:29, 3 February 2009 (PST)
New Idea
What does everyone think about including the Deuterocanon (known as the Apocrypha to Protestants) in the Bible section on WikiChristian? (or maybe a new section altogether?) The deutero is accepted as the inspired Word of God by over half of all professing Christians, so I think it's unfair to leave them completely out. Thoughts? :) -- P.B. Pilhet / Talk 08:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'm for it. ~Darth Stabro ~(Talk) 09:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's a good thought that inevitably is going to come up from time to time, but, paradoxically I both disagree and agree to a certain extent. There already is some information about the Deuterocanon in the Bible section. You can edit it and add information if you like. The major difficulty is that different denominations have different books that they consider Scripture. Protestants have 66 books they consider Scripture; the Roman Catholic Church has around 10 additional books included in Scripture; the Eastern Orthodox Church has around 15 additional books in its Scripture and the Ethiopian Orthodox Church has around 20 additional books. Thus we made the decision early in WikiChristian's history that only the 66 books that are considered part of the canon by all denominations would be taken as the Bible. That's not to say that we shouldn't write about the views of various denominations about which books are part of the Bible and which are not. So, yes I think it is good to talk about the Deuterocanon in the Bible section and talk about the views of different denominations regarding it, but, no, I am not in favour of putting the Deuterocanoniacal texts in the Bible name-spare (I think they need to stay in the Text name-space - see WikiChristian:Bible) and no, I am not in favour of changing the WikiChristian:Statement of Faith that states that the Bible "contents are every book of the Protestant canon (at least)." Anyway, that's my two-cents. --Graham 19:43, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'm for it. Use the Bible name space to present the broadest accepted canon, and add pages that describe the variations. Each page showing text from disputed books can include a disclaimer to the effect that "Not all Christians include this book in the Bible. See _whatever_ for clarification." I believe that inclusivity in that regard will encourage wider participation, and hence make WikiChristian a larger and more active community. Matt 04:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I think both Graham and Matt have good points... But personally (and that's just personally), I would like Matt's idea to be implemented. The problem with leaving the deuterocanonical writings in the "Text" name-space is that when Christians of either the Catholic or Orthodox branches go to look for their Scriptures they'll almost assuredly try typing something like "Bible:Judith" in the search bar, which will of course just lead them to a blank page. They'll then assume that WikiChristian only caters to/supports Protestantism and they'll leave the site. Even if everyone's against the disclaimer idea, I still think that we could at least upload the whole Deuterocanon (both the Catholic and Orthodox books) and simply create a redirect page in the Bible name-space leading to the Text name-space. On a side note, I think Graham's right when he says the Statement of Faith doesn't need to be changed. -- P.B. Pilhet / Talk 06:05, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I like Justin's compromise idea a lot of uploading the Deuterocanon into the Text namespace and then redirecting Bible:... namespace to the Text:.... namespace. I think it's also important to hear Prab's view before we make any changes regarding this. --Graham 15:30, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- I agree, Prab should definitely have a say in what we do regarding this. -- P.B. Pilhet / Talk 19:20, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Something has changed in the templates
I see a few page layout problems today:
- InfoBoxes don't have a border
- Tables don't have borders
- The left pane has two search controls (the first of which is inoperable)
Anyone know why? Can anyone fix it? Matt 05:16, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- In MediaWiki:Sidebar evrything seems to be ok.... as far as the search thingy... and I'll look into the borders...~Darth Stabro ~(Talk)(contribs) 06:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
The duplicated search control has now gone. Thanks. But any news on the table borders? As you know, I've been working on Biblical_references_to_technology for a while, and it is very difficult to scan now that there is no line between rows and that the vertical alignment is middle rather than top. Matt 04:50, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Testing Daily Devotion Template
|