Category talk:Biblical manuscripts

Conventions for handling biblical manuscripts at English Wiki

 * This is a work in progress. As we expand the number of articles, more issues will arise, some may need to be reviewed.
 * So far some of us have agreed on the following naming conventions:
 * papyri: e.g. Papyrus 66 (for P66)
 * uncial manuscripts with conventional names: e.g. Codex Alexandrinus (for A / Uncial 01)
 * other uncials: e.g. Uncial 0220 (for 0220)
 * "Versions" (manuscripts of NT in languages other than Greek) are apparant from the "Script" field in the infobox.
 * Diglots can be noted by using e.g. Greek/Latin.
 * Manuscripts with Old Testament contents are similarly apparant from the "Text" field in the infobox.
 * Articles are likely to fall into multiple categories: e.g. Oxyrynchus manuscripts, Coptic versions, Illuminated manuscripts, 4th century books, etc.
 * However, the primary categories Papyri, Uncials, Miniscules, Lectionaries should be mutually exclusive.
 * Diglots and large codices containing Old and New Testaments as well as extra canonical material provide us with a classification challenge we have not as yet clarified.
 * The distinct traditions of the Hebrew and Greek texts of the Jewish canon also present an unresolved challenge.
 * Please feel free to add suggestions, question current practice or ask for help.
 * Alastair Haines 05:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Please feel free to add suggestions, question current practice or ask for help.
 * Alastair Haines 05:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Jewish and Christian texts
What is the rationale behind including Category:Christian texts but not Category:Jewish texts?-Andrew c [talk] 16:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Christian manuscripts
Category:Christian manuscripts simply CANNOT be a parent to this article, as the concept of a "Biblical manuscript" is larger than a single religion. We could do it the other way around where:


 * Biblical manuscripts
 * Christian manuscripts
 * Jewish manuscripts

But I believe that this would simply add another layer of hierarchy that doesn't add that much information, and could create confusion for a number of early manuscripts (Jewish Christian as one example). There was a big discussion a couple years back that created the current system in use today. I think Carl is being a bit too bold in not at least trying to get consensus for a new system before hand, and even worse edit warring over retaining these bold, new changes. What is the problem with the current system, how does the new category "Christian manuscripts" address this problem, and what specific purpose does the category serve. Can we at least agree that it cannot possibly be a parent article here as "Biblical manuscripts" is not specifically Christian in that include Jewish manuscripts.-Andrew c [talk] 18:45, 19 December 2008 (UTC)