Talk:Spirituality of Opus Dei: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Tom Morris No edit summary |
imported>Evandro Bacarin |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Shouldn't this be at [[Opus Dei's spirituality]]? See [[CZ:Naming Conventions]] re capitalization. | Shouldn't this be at [[Opus Dei's spirituality]]? See [[CZ:Naming Conventions]] re capitalization. | ||
: yes. I'll check naming conventions. BTW, Tom Morris suggested other names which are better than the original one. --[[User:Evandro Bacarin|Evandro Bacarin]] 16:28, 7 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
---- | |||
Also, this needs wikilinks, e.g., a link back to [[Opus Dei]]...and many more. See [[CZ:Article_Mechanics_Complete#Link_copiously.2C_but_relevantly|this]] for some notes about linking. | Also, this needs wikilinks, e.g., a link back to [[Opus Dei]]...and many more. See [[CZ:Article_Mechanics_Complete#Link_copiously.2C_but_relevantly|this]] for some notes about linking. | ||
Finally, others may disagree and I don't strongly insist on this as Editor-in-Chief, but putting in outlines into an article tends to scare potential collaborators off from joining in. My reasoning is, what if they'd like to write about the subject, but not according to the strict plan the first author happens to have worked out? --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 13:46, 24 January 2009 (UTC) | Finally, others may disagree and I don't strongly insist on this as Editor-in-Chief, but putting in outlines into an article tends to scare potential collaborators off from joining in. My reasoning is, what if they'd like to write about the subject, but not according to the strict plan the first author happens to have worked out? --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 13:46, 24 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
: I thought it would encourage people to contribute, but, as you said, might be the opposite. --[[User:Evandro Bacarin|Evandro Bacarin]] 16:28, 7 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
:: | |||
:Open Dei? Is that a typo? I'm assuming you are questioning the capitalised "s" and a move to [[Opus Dei's spirituality]]? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 13:53, 24 January 2009 (UTC) | :Open Dei? Is that a typo? I'm assuming you are questioning the capitalised "s" and a move to [[Opus Dei's spirituality]]? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 13:53, 24 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
| Line 14: | Line 22: | ||
:I'm not sure we need a separate article, but if we do, I think "Opus Dei's Spirituality" is a bad name - [[Spirituality of Opus Dei]] or [[Spiritual tradition of Opus Dei]] would be better. The possessive-contractive form used for the article name seems strange. I've cleaned up the article as per Larry's suggestion to remove the outline. I think that it's probably not a bad idea to put outlines of planned sections in a non-comment section at the top of the talk page. Perhaps we should have a 'scratchpad' area, a bit like a piece of scrap paper that one is given to write notes on during an examination. --[[User:Tom Morris|Tom Morris]] 13:23, 5 February 2009 (UTC) | :I'm not sure we need a separate article, but if we do, I think "Opus Dei's Spirituality" is a bad name - [[Spirituality of Opus Dei]] or [[Spiritual tradition of Opus Dei]] would be better. The possessive-contractive form used for the article name seems strange. I've cleaned up the article as per Larry's suggestion to remove the outline. I think that it's probably not a bad idea to put outlines of planned sections in a non-comment section at the top of the talk page. Perhaps we should have a 'scratchpad' area, a bit like a piece of scrap paper that one is given to write notes on during an examination. --[[User:Tom Morris|Tom Morris]] 13:23, 5 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
::I created a separated article because the main article was copied from wikipedia. | |||
::Both names are better than the original one. Feel free to change it. | |||
Revision as of 11:28, 7 February 2009
Couple comments
Evandro, thanks for keeping up your work here. Just a few friendly comments...
Shouldn't this be at Opus Dei's spirituality? See CZ:Naming Conventions re capitalization.
- yes. I'll check naming conventions. BTW, Tom Morris suggested other names which are better than the original one. --Evandro Bacarin 16:28, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Also, this needs wikilinks, e.g., a link back to Opus Dei...and many more. See this for some notes about linking.
Finally, others may disagree and I don't strongly insist on this as Editor-in-Chief, but putting in outlines into an article tends to scare potential collaborators off from joining in. My reasoning is, what if they'd like to write about the subject, but not according to the strict plan the first author happens to have worked out? --Larry Sanger 13:46, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- I thought it would encourage people to contribute, but, as you said, might be the opposite. --Evandro Bacarin 16:28, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
- Open Dei? Is that a typo? I'm assuming you are questioning the capitalised "s" and a move to Opus Dei's spirituality? Chris Day 13:53, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oops, yes, fixed now above. --Larry Sanger 13:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure we need a separate article, but if we do, I think "Opus Dei's Spirituality" is a bad name - Spirituality of Opus Dei or Spiritual tradition of Opus Dei would be better. The possessive-contractive form used for the article name seems strange. I've cleaned up the article as per Larry's suggestion to remove the outline. I think that it's probably not a bad idea to put outlines of planned sections in a non-comment section at the top of the talk page. Perhaps we should have a 'scratchpad' area, a bit like a piece of scrap paper that one is given to write notes on during an examination. --Tom Morris 13:23, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- I created a separated article because the main article was copied from wikipedia.
- Both names are better than the original one. Feel free to change it.