Talk:Evangelic

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Evangelic redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Christianity Mid‑importance

	Christianity portal This redirect 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 21 August 2016[edit]

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: Redirected to Evangelicalism. (non-admin closure) Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 14:30, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Evangelic → Evangelical – "Evangelical" is the commonly used English name, not "Evangelic". That's what the Websters entry is under. That's the term used in Church names. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:59, 21 August 2016 (UTC) --Relisting. Omni Flames (talk) 12:05, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Evangelical is a redirect to Evangelicalism. Editor2020 (talk) 00:39, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And we can move over the redirect. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:55, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The only form used is Evangelical, nobody translates evangelisch to "Evangelic". I'm not sure if that word even exists.Ernio48 (talk) 10:14, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this article. It seems to be a DICDEF. Srnec (talk) 02:28, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - it's just a dicdef. Red Slash 18:54, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to Evangelicalism, per WP:DICDEF, WP:NOT#DICT. If we were to keep this for some reason, yes, it would be at the longer name as a normal English word; "Evangelic" is obsolete. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 22:35, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to Evangelicalism, I agree. Webbbbbbber (talk) 02:16, 31 August 2016 (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.

Categorisation[edit]

The current categorization needs improvement. The article is about Lutheranism and Evangelicalism so it should be categorized in both. Christianity and Protestantism are redundant because Lutheranism and Evangelicalism are in the tree of Christianity and Protestantism already. The addition "in Europe" doesn't make sense, because neither Lutheranism nor Evangelicalism are restricted to Europe. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:14, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is it about Lutheranism? How?Ernio48 (talk) 13:44, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to sustain this article[edit]

consider discussing the word Evangelical in two different spheres:

Evangelical as referring to Evangelicalism
Evangelical as synonym of the word Protestant in continental Europe/mainline Protestant denominations elsewhere

Ernio48 (talk) 15:37, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Or make it a disambugation page or sth. This doesnt need to be a separate article.Ernio48 (talk) 16:29, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is not synonymous with Evangelicalism so it makes no sense to move it there. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:10, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, to most of the English speakers it happens to be synonymous.Ernio48 (talk) 13:43, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well to the dictionaries that were reference, that's not the case. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:50, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]