Talk:History of Reformed Christianity

Christianity: History / Reformed Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Christian history (assessed as High-importance).
	Reformed Christianity portal This article is supported by WikiProject Reformed Christianity (assessed as Top-importance).

Description of the picture is incomplete

I see at least two people in the 17th century engraving picture (Jan Hus and John Wyclif) that I don't see named in its description. Could somebody complete the description for the picture? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.15.55.134 (talk) 00:17, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Reconstruction

What? It finished in 2001?? StAnselm 12:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure, so I removed it. But for that matter, when did the Reformation finish :). Basically, I haven't heard much about Reconstructionism since Rushdoony died; I remeber hearing a comment by Sandlin that it wasn't needed as a movement any more because it had already gotten into the churches, so from his point of view, it was a success. Anyway, I took the year off. Thanks.

-- TimNelson 12:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Calvinism which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 19:29, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The result of the move request was: Not Moved Mike Cline (talk) 16:42, 15 December 2015 (UTC) (Result added by Micraboy (talk) 06:37, 11 October 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Lead section

Hi, in my opinion this edit broke the lead section. I think there should be a bit more in the lead. A quote from my discussion on the editor's user page: "In my opinion any article and its lead section should start with a description of the article topic. In this case, there could first be something general on Calvinism, not just the history of it. [...] Currently it starts abruptly and seems to miss a bit. The first sentence does not seem to be good English (I am not a native speaker of English but still). At least, please add a wikilink to the article on Calvinism and have the topic in bold somewhere in the early lead. Thank you." --Micraboy (talk) 06:37, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]