392
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→More deletions: confusing apocrypha
::: Yeah, it's coming along. Deleting makes me so nervous! Over on ReformedWord, I have every Greek word used more than 50 times defined. I've made the Latin and Hebrew pages machine formatted, it will just be turning loose the bots. I'm also working on Apocrypha pages too. Did you decided what's best here for those? Any Catholics around to ask? --[[User:Aquatiki|Aquatiki]] 21:14, 23 September 2008 (PDT)
:::: You've done really well with the deleting. One difficulty comes in that the canon of scripture is different for so many different churches - the Greek Orthodox are different from the Roman Catholic, who are different from the Coptic Orthodox, who are different again from the Ethiopian Orthodox. So it gets complicated. I think the Bible name-space should be reserved for the 66 agreed books - Protestant, Catholics, Orthodox, Oriental churches all agree on those. For the other apocryphal texts, I think we should put them in the Text namespace once it is created (or do you have a better name for this name-space). Regarding whether or not we do it verse by verse or just for chapters - I'm not particularly fussed. I think individual verses would be fine if that's your preference. --[[User:Graham grove|Graham grove]] 09:15, 1 October 2008 (PDT)
::::: Yeah, you're right. Have you seen the Ethiopian scripture set?! They have something like 88 ''more'' books, most of which are only existent in Ethiopian. '''Text''' seems like a good namespace name. So would there then be pages like [[Judith 1:1]] which would follow the format of Bible verse pages? Most apocrypha stuff has Greek and Latin but no Hebrew (not even modern renditions). See ReformedWord ''Prayer_of_Azariah_1'' as an example, since I've been working on this over there lately. --[[User:Aquatiki|Aquatiki]] 13:01, 1 October 2008 (PDT)
== BotUm making mistakes. ==
