Talk:Barn church

Use of non-English sources
Use of non-English sources. Per Verifiability : "Citations to non-English reliable sources are allowed on the English Wikipedia. However, because this project is in English, English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when available and of equal quality and relevance. As with sources in English, if a dispute arises involving a citation to a non-English source, editors may request a quotation of relevant portions of the original source be provided, either in text, in a footnote, or on the article talk page.". There are no English-language sources in this article. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:26, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * This article is sourced, that you do not like that, is your problem. Repeatedly claiming that it is unsourced is vandalism. The Banner  talk 12:50, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * And with your earlier attempts to derail the article and accusation of WP:OR I do not feel the need to mince my words. The Banner  talk 13:00, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Please re-read the guideline. There's not much difference between an untranslated foreign-language source and having no source at all. Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:07, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Should your skills not be adequate to the task of translating the sources to good British-variant English, fear not, help is available. Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:09, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, more warnings for vandalism are indeed available. And it states already in your quote that non-English sources are allowed. Do not invent new guidelines. The Banner  talk 13:26, 5 April 2021 (UTC)


 * First, both of the sources currently cited have a “read in English” option, so they qualify as “English-language” sources. Second, while we do prefer English-language sources, we absolutely allow reliable sources written in other languages.  There is no requirement that an article have even one source written in English.  What we require are reliable sources, and reliable sources can be in any language.
 * That said... the two sources currently cited are somewhat weak. I am not sure they can be considered reliable (I would assess the “canon” source as being borderline... and the “nd” source as unreliable). Please search for better (an academic source would be ideal). Blueboar (talk) 15:46, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that input. Could be worse. Could be a recipe for roast chicken. Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:20, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * You should really start with AGF, Laurel Lodged. The Banner  talk 17:32, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Are these structures unique to the Netherlands?
On looking for sources about this topic, I suspect that these structures may be unique to the Netherlands... If so, that should be explained in the article. Also, while I find very little scholarly sources if I search google scholar for “Barn Church”... I find quite a bit when I search for “Schuurkerk” (ie in Dutch). This may be a topic where it is best to NOT translate the article title into English, and to redirect it to the non-English term Schuurkerk. It is likely that an English speaker searching for information about these structures will do so after coming across the Dutch term for them, and thus will search for it using the Dutch. We can include a parenthetical translation in the opening sentence so the curious know what the Dutch term means. Blueboar (talk) 17:33, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * No, as I have used several (3) books about churches that mention the term "Barn Church" as a description of a specific type of church building. Unfortunately, it is hard to get books out of the library right now. The Banner  talk 17:38, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Good to know. This struck me as an interesting (if obscure) topic. I look forward to seeing the article improve, and learning more about these structures as it develops.  Thank you for your work. Blueboar (talk) 19:42, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * If I get the chance, I will improve the article. The Banner  talk 11:39, 6 April 2021 (UTC)