Template talk:Religion primary

Better terminology

I have restored the wording "religion, faith or other such belief system" (from just "religion"), which makes this template more useful. My (traditional) church refers to itself as a "faith community"; I believe the expanded wording better reflects the use of this template. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:33, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted you, because 1. you see yourself that there is no consensus, so why do you repeat this without first establishing consensus? 2. the text and title would be at odds: the title is specifically and only "religion primacy". In any case, please see the discussion below, which I copied from my talkpage, and propose to continue here.

You reverted me here, commenting "not needed". I'm puzzled. Are there similar templates for those other uses that I'm unaware of, or is there some other reasoning at play? LeadSongDog come howl! 16:15, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because the template needs to balance accuracy with being to the point. I think that the word "religion" includes "faith and other such belief systems" for most editors. If you disagree with me, please feel free to raise the issue on the talkpage or anywhere else. Please drop me a note if you do. Debresser (talk) 20:44, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly I disagree, that was the point of my original edit. Most users will not understand "religion" to include such things as astrology, numerology, homeopathy, racism, nationalistic bigotry, etc. Some will not even consider it to include scientology, transcendental meditation, etc. Yet all these areas have problems similar to religion articles, with walled garden sourcing being used extensively, irrespective of its basis in a belief system that carries little credence outside the wall.LeadSongDog come howl! 22:14, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. I had no idea you were referring to such "belief systems". But obviously a template named Template:Religion primary doesn't have the right name to gather all those things under its banner. The current template was created as a generalization of Template:Religious text primary, and you propose a further generalization. Please consider the existing templates: Template:Too few opinions and Template:Unbalanced. Debresser (talk) 01:05, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately those templates address content, not sourcing. Others that come closer are Template:Third-party and Template:Primary source-inline, but neither quite hits the mark. I'd really prefer to see a template that takes a parameter to clarify the kind of faith/religion/cult/belief/etc that the problematic primary source refers to and is based upon. LeadSongDog come howl! 04:32, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, but that template would have to carry another name than "religion primary". Debresser (talk) 09:43, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The other option which occurs to me is the use of additional template aliases such as {{faith primary}} or {{ideology primary}}, but I'm not sure we really need more diversity of templates: finding the right one to apply can be tough enough already. LeadSongDog come howl! 14:21, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with LeadSongDog, and hope we don't let pride of ownership get in the way of making this template more in accordance with everyday use of language and practicality. Look up the word religion in any dictionary, and you come up with wording related to "belief systems" or "faith". I don't see any problem at all with simply expanding the text in the existing template, I believe that is a better and more practical solution than trying to find an alternate name, but considering one person wants to preserve inadequate wording and two want to update it, perhaps the only solution will be a move. I suggest "belief systems" instead of "religion", but the most practical choice is to simply update the wording in the existing template, and I can't find a rational reason for objecting to it. It is rare for any template, in one word, to encompass everything the template is used for, and we don't have a template for the purposes LeadSongDog mentions. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:30, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disregarding the unfounded allusion to WP:OWN, I still think that "religion" is too specific to encompass "faith and other belief systems". If this template were moved to "Faith primary", I would no longer object though. Note that "faith and other belief systems" should imho not include the word "such". Debresser (talk) 17:20, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps change "religion" to "faith-based"? It is hard to find one word to encompass the territory (which is why I don't understand why the wording can't just spell it out). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:35, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weighing in, I agree that 'religion' is very specific and, as mentioned, doesn't cover belief systems, way of life philosophies, etc. On the other hand I also think that this template is specifically titled "religion". If a compromise can't be reached, I support the above approach - create a new 'faith primary' with the stated terminology (religion, belief, or faith). Documentation can be added on this template to use the new template when referring to a faith or belief system. This template can then, at a later date, be merged, if consensus exists. LT910001 (talk) 01:08, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So, would anyone object to a move to {{faith primary}} and a redirect from Template:religion primary, done together with a rewording of the notice from "religion" to "faith"? LeadSongDog come howl! 04:35, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As LT910001 suggested, let's first create Template:Faith primary. If somebody would want to open a merge discussion at Tfd, that could be done later. A two-step approach. Debresser (talk) 08:29, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care how we fix it, as long as we do .... we need a template that covers belief systems that are faith-based ... and I think faith-based is more descriptive than faith. Also, if I need to weigh in on some or another discussion anywhere else, would appreciate a ping. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:02, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]