User talk:Ltwin/Archive 2020s

GA review of Elizabethan Religious Settlement
Hey, I'll be continuing the Talk:Elizabethan Religious Settlement/GA1. Kingsif (talk) 18:03, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Kingsif.Looking forward to it. Ltwin (talk) 21:51, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Elizabethan Religious Settlement
The article Elizabethan Religious Settlement you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Elizabethan Religious Settlement for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mathglot -- Mathglot (talk) 00:20, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Elizabethan Religious Settlement
The article Elizabethan Religious Settlement you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Elizabethan Religious Settlement for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mathglot -- Mathglot (talk) 02:21, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Luther's Marian theology
Hi, now I think my original idea was half-baked. I'm not asking you to change your support for it though.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 03:47, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Worship service (evangelicalism)
Dear User:Ltwin, I noticed that the article worship service (evangelicalism) was created as a content fork of the articles about contemporary worship and church service. What are your thoughts on this? I notice that this was challenged before. I look forward to hearing from you. With regards, AnupamTalk 20:47, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Anupam, I generally take an expansive approach to Wikipedia (the more the better), but I'm struggling to find a reason for this article to exist. I could see a use for a "Pentecostal worship service" or a "Methodist worship service" or "Baptist . .." and so on by tradition, but evangelicalism is such a broad category I don't see the need for this particular article. Those are my thoughts. Ltwin (talk) 02:47, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, I'm also concerned that it will be difficult for the article's creator to be balanced in how different types of evangelicals worship. There is no mention, for example, of evangelical Anglican liturgy or more formal worship that exists. In fact, the article claims, dubiously, that "there is no liturgy." So, this article brings up a lot of concerns. Ltwin (talk) 02:55, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * These are my thoughts exactly. The word "evangelicalism" is as broad as "Protestantism" itself and such an article seems to create more confusion than it does help. With regards, AnupamTalk 03:23, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Your help desk question
I saw this in the archives and just wanted to make sure you had seen the response.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  22:50, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks User:Vchimpanzee. I did see it, and it actually seemed to resolve itself pretty quickly after I posted that comment. I guess it was just a bug. Ltwin (talk) 02:07, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Worship music
After I saw the section above mine, I think you would be interested in this. Worship music redirects to Contemporary worship music. I can see a case for this because some people use the term "worship music" in this way, but there was and is worship music that is not contemporary. I don't remember where the discussion was, but the other person wasn't convinced there was a need for an article about worship music in general.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  22:53, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I guess the more traditional worship music would be covered by Church music. Ltwin (talk) 02:11, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * There was a discussion of that, but I don't know where. No one mentioned that article.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  16:35, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Southern Baptist Convention change
Ltwin, I cannot quote a “reliable” source since I was referencing the Bible, itself. There is no example of the “voting in” or “re-baptizing” anyone in the biblical texts. There are post-biblical texts that were written centuries later, but none in the Bible itself, which is what I was stating. Screw279 (talk) 00:01, 12 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Then it's original research, User:Screw279. Original research is not allowed on Wikipedia, see No original research. Ltwin (talk) 01:39, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

I don’t agree that it is original, merely absent from the original texts. If anything I would be referring to the absence of this example in the NT scriptures. Not an interpretation of doctrine within. Screw279 (talk) 05:23, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * User:Screw279, it doesn't matter what you think is absent from the Bible. Wikipedia has core content policies that every editor must follow. These include that information in articles must be verifiable (see Verifiability) and attributed to reliable sources (see Reliable sources). What you or I think or know about the Bible is irrelevant. Ltwin (talk) 08:03, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Gender and biological sex - ACNA
I've added a section to the 'Talk' page at ACNA on your 'undoing' of my revision. Please review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:7B91:5600:B98F:DC4A:43C7:B206 (talk) 08:02, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Evangelical Anglicanism:
Thanks for your thoughtful edit. Agreed - however Packer does - in the source - specifically emphasise that a Conversion Experience is not necessary, and Harp's view is certainly held by some non-evangelicals, (and no doubt by some individual evangelical Anglicans, though I do not think it is in any way 'mainstream'). So I have added it back in, but you might kindly cast an eye over it to see what you think of the edit. Aye, Springnuts (talk) 10:03, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Calendar (New Style) Act 1750
I notice that you are a regular editor at Book of Common Prayer, so I wondered if perhaps you might be able to advise at Talk:Calendar (New Style) Act 1750? I suspect that we may have a very long-standing, credible, but unsupported assertion.--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:41, 12 November 2020 (UTC)