48:. Those who point out there isn't actually any encyclopedic commentary in this article are correct — whether it is Wikisourceable or not, I am unclear as I do not work on that project (although I suspect it probably has all the biblical source material it wants by now). Thus, I think this is an AfD that does deal quite specifically with this version of this material. There seems to be a formative, but currently insubstantial suggestion that something similar to this could be done very much more satisfactorily, and possibly under a different title. -
158:
really about
Genesis 1:1-3. It is about a comparision of major Bible translations. Notice that the pages that link to it are linking for that reason, and indeed Genesis 1:1-3 has a much more comprehensive list of Bible translations than do the individual verse pages. So I vote to keep it but
346:
This is an extremely valuable page to see a different old testament translations compared. I think that the all the
Knowledge articles on Bible translations would be severely diminished without a single page where examples of each of the translations can be easily compared. The comparison of
146:
I have two comments. (A) Yes, I agree that this page is redundant with 1:1, 1:2, 1:3, but I vehemently oppose the idea that every Bible verse gets a separate
Knowledge page. So I would rather delete 1:1, 1:2, and 1:3, and keep the Genesis 1:1-3 page. (B) Before deleting the article
120:: Thank you for that helpful information, Kinu. Genesis 1:1-1:3 all have individual articles (see the links at the bottom of this article), and all have similar comparisons between different versions of the verses. However,
323:. Important biblical verses which have probably been the object of enormous amounts of theological interpretation and allusions in art and literature over the centuries, but none of that is in this article.
359:
think that these particular verses are the most obvious one's to allow a comparison of Old
Testament translations, and thus serve an extremely valuable role in the whole Bible translation domain.
366:
point that the page is really about a comparison rather than about a particular attempt per se to explain these verses, nonetheless, for the name to be consistent with other verses (such as
66:
If I have marked this for deletion in error, please forgive me. However, this article seems like something that should be on
Wikisource, not here. Or perhaps merged with or linked from
370:), I think they have the correct Knowledge title - by all means have a redirect page called "Comparison of Old Testament verses" or do a link of the type ], but leave the name as is.
124:
especially has some information that could be worth keeping. Perhaps keep this article with added commentary, keep
Genesis 1:1 for notability and good information, and delete
103:
273:
book, and that is really what this is. Many of the translations themselves expressly state just how many verses can reasonably be taken. For example, the
231:. Not again. Source text belongs on Wikisource. Comparisons are original research and belong on the creator's website, or Wikibooks at best. Get going.
258:
Having an article for every verse might be a copyright violation. An article that quotes several verses for a specific purpose is not.
212:
183:
17:
202:
I used your reasoning, that it's merely a list of translations, to come to my conclusion. Nothing to explain. --
391:
36:
390:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
374:
331:
315:
299:
295:— lacking in critical analysis, neutral interpretations, historical nuggets, &c.; non-encyclopedic. —
285:
262:
249:
235:
217:
197:
188:
163:
136:
110:
94:
74:
54:
312:
246:
208:
179:
148:
60:
371:
282:
259:
194:
160:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
159:
rename it something like "Old
Testament Translation Samples" or something along those lines.
152:
193:
Can you clarify? You said "delete per
Lawrence King", but my vote was to keep and rename.
274:
281:
is free, provided that they do not comprise a whole book, nor more than 50% of the work".
203:
174:
133:
91:
71:
328:
348:
324:
296:
232:
129:
125:
121:
49:
269:
There is of course no copyright violation of taking small quotes from almost
367:
107:
355:
support having hundreds (or even thousands) of verses on
Knowledge, but I
308:
88:
67:
245:. Is everyone here comfortable that there's no copyvio here? I'm not.
327:, OTOH, is a useful article (but could no doubt still be expanded).
384:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
351:is nearly worthless due to their similarity. I do
173:per Lawrence King - Knowledge is not Wikisource --
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
277:states that: "Use of up to 1000 verses from the
394:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
154:. It seems to me that this article is
7:
151:, take a look at what links to it:
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
375:16:11, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
332:13:31, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
316:20:13, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
300:18:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
286:16:16, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
263:00:13, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
250:18:32, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
236:16:40, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
218:00:48, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
198:06:21, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
189:05:56, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
164:03:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
55:20:46, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
44:The result of the debate was
137:21:18, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
111:20:58, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
95:20:56, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
75:20:49, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
411:
387:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
307:, we already have a
347:versions shown on
216:
187:
132:as unnecessary? -
53:
402:
389:
206:
177:
144:Keep but rename.
104:this information
52:
34:
410:
409:
405:
404:
403:
401:
400:
399:
398:
392:deletion review
385:
364:Lawrence King's
279:Good News Bible
275:Good News Bible
64:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
408:
406:
397:
396:
380:
379:
378:
377:
360:
341:
340:
334:
318:
313:132.205.45.110
302:
289:
288:
267:
266:
265:
253:
252:
247:Carlossuarez46
239:
238:
225:
224:
223:
222:
221:
220:
167:
166:
140:
139:
114:
113:
97:
63:
58:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
407:
395:
393:
388:
382:
381:
376:
373:
372:Brusselsshrek
369:
365:
362:I understand
361:
358:
354:
350:
345:
344:
343:
342:
338:
335:
333:
330:
329:u p p l a n d
326:
322:
319:
317:
314:
310:
306:
303:
301:
298:
294:
291:
290:
287:
284:
283:Brusselsshrek
280:
276:
272:
268:
264:
261:
260:Lawrence King
257:
256:
255:
254:
251:
248:
244:
243:Speedy Delete
241:
240:
237:
234:
230:
227:
226:
219:
214:
210:
205:
201:
200:
199:
196:
195:Lawrence King
192:
191:
190:
185:
181:
176:
172:
169:
168:
165:
162:
161:Lawrence King
157:
153:
150:
149:Genesis 1:1-3
145:
142:
141:
138:
135:
131:
127:
123:
119:
116:
115:
112:
109:
105:
101:
98:
96:
93:
90:
86:
82:
79:
78:
77:
76:
73:
69:
62:
61:Genesis 1:1-3
59:
57:
56:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
386:
383:
363:
356:
352:
336:
320:
304:
292:
278:
270:
242:
228:
170:
155:
143:
117:
99:
84:
80:
65:
45:
43:
31:
28:
349:Genesis 1:1
337:Strong Keep
325:Genesis 1:1
130:Genesis 1:3
126:Genesis 1:2
122:Genesis 1:1
83:per nom or
368:John 3:16
311:article.
204:Thesquire
175:Thesquire
213:contribs
184:contribs
134:Danaman5
92:Ryanjunk
72:Danaman5
309:Genesis
118:Comment
100:Comment
89:Genesis
68:Genesis
321:Delete
293:Delete
233:Stifle
229:Delete
171:Delete
102:: See
81:Delete
50:Splash
46:DELETE
305:DELTE
87:with
85:Merge
16:<
209:talk
180:talk
128:and
108:Kinu
106:. --
353:not
297:RJH
271:any
156:not
70:? -
357:do
211:-
182:-
339:.
215:)
207:(
186:)
178:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.