I have reverted you additions of "Jewish man" to the Apostle articles. It not a rule that this should be included, MOS is a guideline, and the consensus to make this change is weak as it stands given that you had to change the long standing lead sentence of several articles to include this. Only the article for Judas has this information in the lead sentence. Golikom (talk) 18:26, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is not a valid argument. Consensus can change, especially as I didn't see that there had been previous discussion of this for the apostle (though maybe I missed as I had done a very cursory search). You have to bring a concrete reason why we should deviate here from the MOS. BTW why didn't you remove the words "Jewish man" from Judas as well? Vegan416 (talk) 19:09, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's entirely valid. The MoS is a guideline, not a rule, and in the examples cited in the MoS only one is as explicit as the change you made. Obviously consensus can change - you're welcome to go and get a new consensus established - but currently there is clear equivalence across 11 of 12 articles.
The change to Judas is relatively recent and the cited source doesn't support it. I left it because it's been there for a while and probably serves as the counterpoint example should you wish to take the discussion further. Golikom (talk) 19:56, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't bring any concrete reason why not to include the word "Jewish". Why does it bother you?
It doesn't "bother" me, but that's not relevant one way or another. To me it is clearly confusing to label those who were by definition the first Christians as Jewish in the opening sentence. There's an obvious clash of nationality and religion here. You'd have to ask the editor why they only added it to Judas. Golikom (talk) 03:00, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no clash of nationality and religion here. This is simply the historical truth. The apostles were Jews both ethnically and religiously. Most of the first Christians were Jewish both ethnically and religiously. Do you deny that? If not, why shouldn't it be mentioned in the first sentence as per MoS?
What I meant by the question about Judas is that it proves that there is no existing consensus not to include "Jewish". As you admit, you know of no reason to make a distinction between Judas and the other apostles (also remember that Paul is also described as Jewish in the first sentence). It's clear that the fact that the word Jewish doesn't appear in other apostle is just coincidental and not the result of some premeditated consensus. Vegan416 (talk) 07:23, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's very hard to believe that 11 out of 12 is a coincidence, especially when the outlier is a very recent edit. And you're being disingenuous about Paul since you made that change very recently yourself. Golikom (talk) 12:41, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I got confused with John the Baptist who had been described as Jewish in the first sentence since 2007.
