OrthodoxWiki talk:Style Manual (Point of View)

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
 
Line 16: Line 16:
  
 
chrisg 2006-05-31-1253
 
chrisg 2006-05-31-1253
 +
 +
:For the reader: the ''Theandros'' link to Nebraska Eparchy is discussed on [[Themistocles (Adamopoulo)]], the page on which the link is made.  Also, afaik, there is no intention to outright exclude.
 +
:Regarding independant groupings - If an article on the Nebraska Eparchy was created, and have the [[template:independant|independant]] template placed on it, then this would be (as far as I can see, anyway) a welcome addition to OW.  However, it is standard practise to have the independant template even on user pages of those who edit on OW but are part of (or lead) an independant group ([[User:Patriarchanthony|example]]).  This, however, is specific to the independant groups.
 +
:There are a lot of pages on [[Oriental Orthodox]] including the church bodies, dogmatic positions and whole articles by Oriental Orthodox personalities.  No special attempt is made to censor these, and the main difference is having the [[template:Oriental|Oriental]] template, saying that it may be different to Eastern Orthodox understanding.  — ''[[User:Pistevo|Pι]]''[[Special:Listusers/sysop|s]]'''[[User talk:Pistevo|τ]]'''[[Special:Contributions/Pistevo|é]]''[[User:Pistevo|vο]]'', at 23:32, May 30, 2006 (CDT)

Revision as of 20:32, May 30, 2006

Biased Bias

When the world wants information on the Coptic Orthodox Church, or the Syric Orthodox Church, or the Indian Orthodox Church, or the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, or the Armenian Orthodox Church, or the Assyrian Orthodox Church, or the Sudanese Orthodox Church, they will NOT be looking for Chalcedonian bias.

To say all the world is looking for Chalcedonian bias when searching for Orthodoxy, is very biased indeed.

The publication Theandros has been linked on OW by one of the OW editors to the Nebraska Eparchy. (Theandros itself says it is independent of any jurisdiction.) The self-proclaimed "Orthodox", of which Nebraska Eparchy seems to be an example, have never had any historical connection with world Orthodoxy. They are quite different from the Pre-Ephesian Orthodox, the Pre-Chalcedonian Orthodox, and the Chalcedonian Orthodox.

If the policy is to exclude the self-proclaimed, then that should be quite different from excluding the Pre-Ephesian or the Pre-Chalcedonian.

Perhaps the policy could be clarified and the self-proclaimed distinguished from historical Orthodoxy.

Hopefully the anti-pre-chalcedonian bias also can be removed or at least substantially toned down.

If the anti-pre-chalcedonian bias cannot be removed, then obviously there is a need for a WorldOrthodoxWiki which does not have this bias.

chrisg 2006-05-31-1253

For the reader: the Theandros link to Nebraska Eparchy is discussed on Themistocles (Adamopoulo), the page on which the link is made. Also, afaik, there is no intention to outright exclude.
Regarding independant groupings - If an article on the Nebraska Eparchy was created, and have the independant template placed on it, then this would be (as far as I can see, anyway) a welcome addition to OW. However, it is standard practise to have the independant template even on user pages of those who edit on OW but are part of (or lead) an independant group (example). This, however, is specific to the independant groups.
There are a lot of pages on Oriental Orthodox including the church bodies, dogmatic positions and whole articles by Oriental Orthodox personalities. No special attempt is made to censor these, and the main difference is having the Oriental template, saying that it may be different to Eastern Orthodox understanding. — sτévο, at 23:32, May 30, 2006 (CDT)
Personal tools
Variants
Actions
Navigation
interaction
Donate

Please consider supporting OrthodoxWiki. FAQs

Toolbox