Talk:Persecution of Christians/Review of the archives
From 6 january 2019 to 12 august 2021
[edit]The purpose of this review based on diffs of discussions from 6 January 2019 to 12 August 2021 is to describe the context of the subsequent discussions at Talk:Persecution of Christians. It is based on a search for the contributions of the most involved editors in the recent debate about the inclusions of two paragraphs: Josephus and Claudian expulsion. It is restricted to comments about inclusion or not. A point that comes out of this review is that, at the least in the perspective of Slatersteven, inclusion or exclusion depended entirely on whether it was persecution or not and the sources had to say it was persecution. If the review is correct, this was challenged only twice. First, by Jenhawks777 on August 7, 2020 without further discussion and, second, briefly by GPinkerton on October 3, 2020.
| Contributor(s) | Diff(s)/Date(s) | Brief description |
|---|---|---|
| Cinadon36, Slatersteven, Ktrimi991 | 6 January 2019 | Slatersteven and Ktrimi991 support tagging or removing what is not persecution. |
| Smeat75, Slatersteven | 10 January 2019 | Slatersteven replies to Smeat75 that we need a definition of persecution and inclusion criteria. |
| Simonm223, Slatersteven | 10 January 2019 | Slatersteven replies that if the source is [notable and] not reliable, we can attribute. |
| Calthinus, Resnjari | 12 January 2019 | Calthinus discusses an inclusion criterion with Resnjari. He says "I don't necessarily think that restricting the rights of Christian 'churches' is necessarily 'persecution of Christians'. I think in this case the phrase or some synonym should be used by the source." Resnjari says it was more than the forbidding of churches. |
| Tamsier, Slatersteven | 2 May 2019 | Tamsier and Slatersteven agreed, referring to a dictionary, that persecution must be systematic and long term. |
| Slatersteven, Objective3000, Ktrimi991 | 9 March 2020 | Slatersteven comments that the article should not be a list of every attack on Christians and others agree, one saying that some editors like to add irrelevant content. |
| Jenhawk777 | 21 May 2020, 21 May 2020, 23 May 2020 | Jenhawk proposes corrections to the section Current situation. David A. find them accurate. |
| Jenhawk777, David A., Slatersteven | 30 July 2020, 1 August 2020 1 August 2020 5 August 2021 | Jenhawk777 says the section on the Nazis, for neutrality, should mention the Confessing church and at the very least, Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Slatersteven says being killed for being vocal is not the same as being killed because you are a Christian. Jenhawk777 says there is a bias: Christians supporting Nazis is mentioned, but there is no mention that those who did not were killed. Slatersteven ignores the argument and repeats that they were not killed because of their faith. David A. supports both, Jenhaw777 and Slatersteven. Jenhawk reexplains his point that there is a bias. Jenhawk777 says he is OK removing both views, Christians supporting Nazis and Christians killed by Nazis, as being off topics, or to include both. |
| Slatersteven, Objective3000, Jenhawk777 | 7 August 2020 | Ignoring the bias mentioned by Jenhawk777 (see 1 August 2020 entry), Slatersteven says that the motive of the persecution must be religious. Objective3000 agrees. Jenhawk777 says that it is not necessary, it is sufficient that the person was persecuted and it was related to his faith. Slatersteven says that he always said "RS have to say it was religious persecution, not just being a Christian." |
| Jenhawk777 | 11 August 2020 | Regarding the Nazis issue, Jenhawk777 suggests the sentence "the Protestant church was divided in its response to Hitler, and some Christians who opposed him died for it." There is no follow-up. |
| 1990'sguy, Slatersteven, GPinkerton | 3 October 2020 | 1990'sguy says Christian were persecuted in Pakistan after the departure of the Sikhs. Slatersteven says it's not because they were Christians, but because of a cast issue and they were homeless. GPinkerton says cast and religion are related. |
| IP 216.14.157.170, Slatersteven, Pincrete, Jenhawk777 | 11 November 2020 | The IP wants to add restrictions due to Covid that affected religious activities as persecution. Slatersteven says the Covid restrictions apply to every one. It's not persecution. The IP replies the court say it was. Pincrete says the court only says that Casinos and other services had less restrictions. Slatersteven conclude that the court only concluded it was unfair, not persecution. Jenhawk777 agreed. |
| Karma1998, Slatersteven | 12 August 2021 | This is the start of the issue with the paragraphs Josephus and Claudian expulsion. Karma1998 wants to include the linked paragraphs. Slatersteven says "RS need to say it was persecution, we can't use wp:or to take a primary text and interpret it. |
Review prepared by Dominic Mayers (talk) 15:40, 29 August 2021 (UTC)