Difference between revisions of "Talk:Filioque"

From OrthodoxWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Added timestamp)
Line 7: Line 7:
 
Do you think it's really necessary to include a misspelled version?  It seems that could set a somewhat awkward precedent.  I don't see that sort of thing in any encyclopedia with which I'm familiar.  —[[User:ASDamick|{{User:ASDamick/sig}}]] 12:39, 4 Jul 2005 (EDT)
 
Do you think it's really necessary to include a misspelled version?  It seems that could set a somewhat awkward precedent.  I don't see that sort of thing in any encyclopedia with which I'm familiar.  —[[User:ASDamick|{{User:ASDamick/sig}}]] 12:39, 4 Jul 2005 (EDT)
  
: Rdr. Andrew, Please feel free to change anything I do. Let me say...I don't know you in the flesh, but have come to appreciate you and your leadership. Maybe the way to approach this is to insert it somewhere in the text or redirect a filoque page to filioque. I just know that this is a very common misspelling (I've done it!). Whatever the community sees fit to do. Maybe we should start something in the style manual about how to address misspellings.
+
: Rdr. Andrew, Please feel free to change anything I do. Let me say...I don't know you in the flesh, but have come to appreciate you and your leadership. Maybe the way to approach this is to insert it somewhere in the text or redirect a filoque page to filioque. I just know that this is a very common misspelling (I've done it!). Whatever the community sees fit to do. Maybe we should start something in the style manual about how to address misspellings. --[[User:Joe Rodgers|{{User:Joe Rodgers/sig}}]] 13:05, 4 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Revision as of 17:05, July 4, 2005

I originally imported this from Wikipedia, but it seems to me that this article needs a major reworking, if not replacement. Its rhetoric is pretty convoluted and unclear. --Rdr. Andrew 19:50, 1 Feb 2005 (CST)

Update: It has, indeed, been significantly reworked! —[[User:ASDamick|—Fr. Andrew talk contribs (THINK!)]] 12:39, 4 Jul 2005 (EDT)


Misspelling?

Do you think it's really necessary to include a misspelled version? It seems that could set a somewhat awkward precedent. I don't see that sort of thing in any encyclopedia with which I'm familiar. —[[User:ASDamick|—Fr. Andrew talk contribs (THINK!)]] 12:39, 4 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Rdr. Andrew, Please feel free to change anything I do. Let me say...I don't know you in the flesh, but have come to appreciate you and your leadership. Maybe the way to approach this is to insert it somewhere in the text or redirect a filoque page to filioque. I just know that this is a very common misspelling (I've done it!). Whatever the community sees fit to do. Maybe we should start something in the style manual about how to address misspellings. --[[User:Joe Rodgers|Joe ( talk » inspect » chat )]] 13:05, 4 Jul 2005 (EDT)