Wikipedia:Peer review/Jesus/archive2

Jesus

(October 2005 Jesus peer review located here: archive 1)

Our last peer review of this article is like half a year old, and besides, we've done a rather large amount of work to this article since then. There are definently more perspectives, we've got good citations for some of them too, and even though there are some we're not compleatly sure on how to do, (I.E. the secular humanist part, bit hard to lump them together and all) I'd just like to ask the peer review community if they have any suggestions about this article to get it to FA status. Homestarmy 21:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO until very recently we've focused more on religious perspectives than on historical perspectives, in part because we were working out the phrasing of the second paragraph. Is there something else we need to do to bring this peer review request to someone's attention? If not, how long should we wait? Grigory Deepdelver of Brockenboring^TalkTCF 14:31, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Christian views could have full sub-sections or summaries, starting after the Pauline Christian views: Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox views. Brand 16:08, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This might work in the subarticle Christian views of Jesus, but I think it would complicate things here. The Orthodox/Catholic/Protestant split is only relevant to doctrines of original sin and the identity of the "brothers and sisters of Jesus." For the nature of Jesus Himself, the real split is between (Nicene) trinitarians and nontrinitarians, and between Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian trinitarians. Grigory Deepdelver of Brockenboring^TalkTCF 16:38, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]