Talk:Religious Issue

Brazil: History Mid‑importance

	Brazil portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics 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.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the History of Brazil task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Catholicism Low‑importance

Religious Issue is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism task list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see Draft articles
Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles
Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page)
Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates
Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall
Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring
NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment
Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism
Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs
Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire
Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral
Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

Requested move 9 July 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 00:32, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Religious Question → Religious question – Grammar. Noun. Chicbyaccident (talk) 22:10, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lean to Oppose – this is the name of a specific particular event and it can be argued to be a proper noun here. In Portuguese, it is either written in title case or within scare quotes, and English literature on it is sparse: Machado uses Religious Question, von Sinner "Religious Question", as does Thornton. This is akin to the Dreyfuss Affair which, to my surprise, rests at the sentence-case, following a brief move war in 2009 or so, so it might be tested in a fresh RM. No such user (talk) 09:38, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per proper noun for a specific event and situation. Or else it's a generic "religious question" which has little meaning to this page. And the Dreyfus Affair is at Dreyfus affair? Thanks for pointing that out No such user, and I'm not seeing an RM so it was boldly moved at some point and can, I would think, be moved back. Some of these things are proper nouns, and this one easily qualifies. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:04, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral, pending further research: We seem to have a lot of articles like this and most are capitalized, so either we're right to do so, or more articles need to move. Some quick looking around shows them commonly capitalized in RS, but not universally. I don't know if it's close enough to overwhelmingly consistent style in the RS to support the capitalization (or whether this varies by case). Being "the name of a specific particular event" isn't sufficient; we routinely lower-case event monickers, most especially when they are are descriptive like this, if the sources do not capitalize them with near uniformity. This particular case has too few sources cited to investigate it yet. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 03:47, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.