317:"The Anglo-American focus is in part a reflection of there being so many U.S. and European Anglophone people working on the project, which in turn is a reflection of the fact that so many of them have access to the Internet. It is also because this is the English-language Knowledge (XXG) and therefore the published sources we rely on tend to be in English and reflect the concerns of the English-speaking world. Similarly, the French Language Knowledge (XXG) may reflect a Francophone bias, and the Japanese Knowledge (XXG) a Japanese bias.
189:
have no article on
Wikiepdia? Can this tempalte be salvaged? maybe, but probably not. We have articles to cover listing denominations, just go to those to find the information, at least there it will be listed according to percentage or size, or some kind of reliable statistic. Not to mention, that this kind of navigation is provided by categories, and we dont need a template when Knowledge (XXG) has a way to categorize things already. I am tempted to nomininate this for deletion. This is just too much.
21:
188:
This template is just rediculous. Only 4 countries have
Christians? and if you are a world wide organization you have to pick which country you belong to, or you have to add to every sub-template? And where are the non-trintiarians, the restorationists, and why are there denominations listed that
111:
No, I think this template needs to be deleted. There are thousands of denominations all over the world - having them in one template is rather silly. We already have category lists for that. Besides, we have the very arbitrary choice of countries here. I guess the template could be salvaged somewhat
173:
Well, maybe we need a third opinion here, but in its current form this template is unacceptable. Just singling out the countries you did propogates a systemic bias in
Knowledge (XXG). Again, I'd be happy with a listing of families, but if it's not improved it in the near future, it will need to be
71:
Very simple-- there are many, many "Presbyterian and
Reformed" denominations in the UK and in the US, but not in the Australia. There are few denominations of most everything in Australia and they need to be grouped somehow. Reformed denominations in Australia are under "Historical Protestantism."
440:
It don't see why we can't have a box containing all the regionals on par with a box containing all denominationals. It is unreasonable to demand a removal of the "region boxes". However, what would be reasonable is to include the "regional associations" on par with "world associations". But if we
55:
Sorry, mate, but there are all sorts of problem here, as well. Dozens of denominations have been left out, of course. The order in which they are listed is puzzling at best. And why is there a category for "Presbyterian and
Reformed" in the UK and US, but not in Australia. A lot of arbitrary
287:
content must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), representing fairly, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. This is non-negotiable and expected of all
362:. I'd read it before, and couldn't remember where it was. But I think the key difference her is that you're introducing a deliberate systemic bias, as opposed to editors just writing about what they know.
444:
I am not completely sure what you mean by WEA - certainly not the record company, but if you mean the World
Evangelical Alliance - I DID NOT REMOVE IT at all. Please look closely before issuing spurious
337:
Note well-- even if we agree this is a systematic bias-- to
Knowledge (XXG) it is an open question if this is even a problem. I think this is a clear case of sensible limiting of a template.
36:
97:
As for denominations being left out, why don't you bring that up within each
Template-- or just add them in. No one ever claimed the templates are done as they sit now. --
340:
The
Francophones can put French denominations on the French Language Knowledge (XXG), and I personally think it would be silly (and difficult) to create it here also. --
76:
359:
310:
225:
520:
418:
remove the boxes of around each of the 6-8 different regionals listed, but keep the box that contains all regional associations as a whole.
524:
509:
486:
475:
453:
431:
371:
349:
198:
183:
164:
145:
If you read the edit screen you will see it is only for deominations of 50,000 members/adherents or more (of
English speaking nations).
129:
106:
88:
65:
272:
516:
494:
482:
258:"Perspective... ...from which to sense, categorize, measure or codify experience, cohesively forming a coherent belief"
27:
441:
call the latter "International asscoations", which is a more fitting title in any case, regionals are a subgroup too.
251:
234:
404:
If you really want to have regional associations to be on par with the denomonation ones, then please
471:
427:
341:
156:
98:
505:
367:
345:
194:
179:
160:
125:
102:
84:
61:
451:
303:
At most, this would just an issue of systematic bias as you can see in this next page I quote.
467:
117:
501:
363:
190:
175:
121:
80:
57:
448:
411:(1) Remove the box of around the different regions listed, or make it always open.
360:
Knowledge (XXG):Neutral_point_of_view/FAQ#Anglo-American_focus_and_systematic_bias
311:
Knowledge (XXG):Neutral_point_of_view/FAQ#Anglo-American_focus_and_systematic_bias
380:
why are the denomonation associations not on par with the regional associations
142:
in a navigation box would be silly -- but that is not what this is about.
265:
What is the coherent belief, etc. of the template? -- there isn't one.
20:
242:
which treat controversial subjects. The article should represent ..."
214:
I have no objection to a 3rd opinion but-- I have to say you have
15:
324:. A special WikiProject has been set up to discuss the issue.
155:
arbitrary at some level. That does not make them POV. --
397:
do not even represent all the denomonations they could
500:Can one or the other be named to distinguish them?
519:would be easier to rename. Try proposing a rename
138:Having all denominations from all over the world
328:Systematic bias is not in itself an NPOV issue
466:New Zealand should appear on this template.--
388:small budgents than denomonation associations
232:"At Knowledge (XXG), points of view (POVs) –
8:
56:decisions go into these sorts of templates.
226:Knowledge (XXG):Describing points of view
218:to show this as any sort of POV issue.
483:Template:Denominations of New Zealand
273:Knowledge (XXG):Neutral point of view
7:
319:Some editors see this as a problem,
481:Feel free to create it anytime at
31:
26:This template was considered for
14:
517:Template:Christian denominations
495:Template:Christian denominations
19:
525:18:31, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
515:You mean renamed? Of the two,
510:12:16, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
1:
358:Thanks for the reference to
454:20:47, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
432:00:19, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
385:Regonals associations have
541:
487:21:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
476:18:44, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
238:– are often essential to
199:19:23, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
425:Do not remove the WEA.--
372:10:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
350:08:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
184:06:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
165:23:21, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
130:23:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
107:14:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
89:23:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
66:23:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
252:Perspective (cognitive)
112:by making it a list of
408:boxes-- not add them.
235:cognitive perspectives
279:"All Knowledge (XXG)
151:navigation templates
51:Another POV Template?
493:distinguishing from
34:. The result of the
391:have smaller staff
48:
47:
532:
430:
33:
23:
16:
540:
539:
535:
534:
533:
531:
530:
529:
498:
464:
426:
382:
321:and some do not
211:
118:Presbyterianism
77:blatantly false
53:
12:
11:
5:
538:
536:
528:
527:
497:
491:
490:
489:
463:
460:
459:
458:
457:
456:
446:
442:
435:
434:
422:
421:
420:
419:
412:
401:
400:
399:
398:
395:
392:
389:
381:
378:
377:
376:
375:
374:
353:
352:
338:
334:
333:
332:
331:
325:
305:
304:
300:
299:
298:
297:
267:
266:
262:
261:
260:
259:
246:
245:
244:
243:
220:
219:
216:totally failed
210:
207:
206:
205:
204:
203:
202:
201:
168:
167:
146:
143:
135:
134:
133:
132:
94:
93:
92:
91:
52:
49:
46:
45:
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
537:
526:
522:
518:
514:
513:
512:
511:
507:
503:
496:
492:
488:
484:
480:
479:
478:
477:
473:
469:
461:
455:
452:
450:
447:
443:
439:
438:
437:
436:
433:
429:
424:
423:
417:
413:
410:
409:
407:
403:
402:
396:
393:
390:
387:
386:
384:
383:
379:
373:
369:
365:
361:
357:
356:
355:
354:
351:
347:
343:
339:
336:
335:
329:
326:
323:
322:
316:
315:
314:
312:
307:
306:
302:
301:
295:
292:, and of all
291:
286:
282:
278:
277:
276:
274:
269:
268:
264:
263:
257:
256:
255:
253:
248:
247:
241:
237:
236:
231:
230:
229:
227:
222:
221:
217:
213:
212:
208:
200:
196:
192:
187:
186:
185:
181:
177:
172:
171:
170:
169:
166:
162:
158:
154:
150:
147:
144:
141:
137:
136:
131:
127:
123:
119:
115:
110:
109:
108:
104:
100:
96:
95:
90:
86:
82:
78:
74:
73:
70:
69:
68:
67:
63:
59:
50:
43:
39:
38:
32:2020 April 16
29:
25:
22:
18:
17:
499:
465:
462:New Zealand?
415:
405:
327:
320:
318:
309:Quote from "
308:
293:
289:
285:encyclopedic
284:
280:
271:Quote from "
270:
250:Quote from "
249:
239:
233:
224:Quote from "
223:
215:
152:
148:
139:
113:
54:
41:
35:
445:complaints.
75:And that's
468:MacRusgail
283:and other
37:discussion
174:deleted.
502:Facts707
428:Carlaude
364:StAnselm
342:Carlaude
296:editors.
290:articles
281:articles
240:articles
191:Bytebear
176:StAnselm
157:Carlaude
122:StAnselm
114:families
99:Carlaude
81:StAnselm
58:StAnselm
28:deletion
449:Str1977
394:do less
294:article
209:Not POV
116:- e.g.
406:remove
521:there
140:would
40:was "
506:talk
472:talk
414:(2)
368:talk
346:talk
195:talk
180:talk
161:talk
126:talk
103:talk
85:talk
62:talk
42:keep
523:.
485:.
153:are
149:All
30:on
508:)
474:)
416:Or
370:)
348:)
197:)
182:)
163:)
128:)
120:.
105:)
87:)
79:.
64:)
44:".
504:(
470:(
366:(
344:(
330:"
313:"
275:"
254:"
228:"
193:(
178:(
159:(
124:(
101:(
83:(
60:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
