Template talk:Religion and politics: Difference between revisions

m Rich Farmbrough moved page Template talk:Relpolnav to Template talk:Religion and politics: Match title
(No difference)

Revision as of 12:15, 22 July 2014

WikiProject iconChristianity
WikiProject iconThis template 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.
WikiProject iconCatholicism
WikiProject iconReligion and politics 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.
Catholicism task list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconIslam
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles 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.
WikiProject iconLaw
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.


Foreseen difficulties

I'm not sure about the current last box: Explicitly Religious Political Movements. Some overtly relgious parties are more extreme than others. Christian parties in Europe (Christian Democratic Union, et al.) are generally populist mainstream parties not always working towards non-secular goals -- although the Kreuzurteil shows that the matter is fuzzy. Precisely how religious should a group be to warrant inclusion? samwaltz 22:38, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't understand what this is supposed to mean. How are Islamism, Christian Reconstructionism, etc. not "explicitly religious"? I'm removing it.Prezbo (talk) 16:20, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other religions

I'd like to see elements of other religions worked in. What else fits? samwaltz 22:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sharia

While some aspects of the Sharia (particularly those advocated by Islamists) can be considered a "political ideology" most of the sharia isn't. The sharia is dominated by dietary laws, laws of marriage and divorce, laws of worship (salat), specification about various rituals (like the pilgrimage). These are pretty much universal activities practiced everyday by ordinary Muslims (e.g. it doesn't take a coup d'etat for a Muslim to avoid alcohol). Inclusion of the sharia in this template seems a bit unnecessary.Bless sins (talk) 19:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The addition of Catholic Church & politics in the US looks pov

Maybe it's the article name itself, but only inserting one article about "The Catholic Church and politics in one country" out of 180 or so, looks pretty funny (peculiar) in the section "Christianity." It kind of reeks of pov either in the article itself, or in the listing in the nav template. There are other religions with an interest in politics. There are other countries. But apparently no other articles? Wow! The formatting for navigating is also unusual. Student7 (talk) 18:52, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Finally dawns on me. The article is mostly about Elections, not politics. Politics is what elected officials do after they are elected. They pass statutes. The average person talks, and talks, and talks, and maybe even votes. Elections are important, but they are hardly "politics." A number of other articles may be affected by this misnaming.
Sharia, for example, really belongs here. What they talk about, they try to enact into law. It's not "just talk," which is what Americans mostly do. Student7 (talk)