Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outline of the Bible

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep and rename to Outline of Bible-related topics. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:29, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Outline of the Bible[edit]

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

Written like an essay and all content is duplicated in articles such as Bible, Books of the Bible, Biblical canon, Authorship of the Bible etc DrStrauss talk 11:22, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an essay, but a list of topics more closely or loosely dealing with the Christian Bible. I suggest renaming to something like List of topics concerning the Bible (akin to say List of articles related to the Syrian Civil War) and giving it a little work. --Ouro (blah blah) 11:58, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ as duplicative. I agree it's not an essay (apart from the introduction, which could be rewritten), but it is the sort of overview that the main Bible article should provide or at least link to. The page Books of the Bible does a decent job of the same overview. Mortee (talk) 12:09, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I have to respectfully disagree with You, Mortee - this is merely a list for somebody who is looking for a quick link. The article You linked to provides more in-depth coverage and requires more sifting. It's a bit different. --Ouro (blah blah) 12:20, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fair enough, I can see why a clean outline without commentary might be useful. Perhaps the real question is how people are going to find it in order to benefit from it. If the article is going to stay it ought to be linked to from the central articles. Otherwise the article on Books of the Bible or one of the existing categories probably covers this just as well. Mortee (talk) 13:28, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - Agreed. It must be marked (named) clearly as a pure list and put in the relevant 'see also' sections and boxes at bottoms of pages. --Ouro (blah blah) 13:39, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bible-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:26, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please rename this outline and do not delete it.--Broter (talk) 20:19, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, rename, and reorganize per the above conversation. How do List of Biblical Topics or Glossary of Judaeo-Christian Terms sound? —Non-Dropframe _talk 20:55, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:48, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, and add a link to it in Template:Bible sidebar. I have no objection to the current name, but if renaming is necessary then I suggest ~~List of Bible-related topics~~. IMHO this is better than "Biblical topics", which might imply topics treated within the text of the Bible. See Category:Wikipedia outlines for other naming patterns within this category. – Fayenatic London 14:17, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Struck my 'delete' vote after discussion. There are several valid options for renaming and/or re-organizing and I don't have a view on which is correct. Mortee (talk) 19:55, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rename to Outline of Bible-related topics – keep in mind it is a member of the set of outlines at Portal:Contents/Outlines, and shares their standard format -- these comprise one of Wikipedia's content navigation systems. Therefore, it should retain "Outline" in the title, but as the Bible isn't just a subject, with the page's title unintendedly implying it is an outline of the book itself, the subject being outlined needs to be clarified. This can be done by renaming it to "Outline of Bible-related topics". That way, we know it is a structured list (an outline), providing links to articles about the Bible. The Transhumanist 19:54, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Pages named "List" can certainly be structured, but I do support this proposed name Outline of Bible-related topics as better than "List". – Fayenatic London 20:46, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – this article was improperly moved to article space via copy and paste. The original draft is Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of the Bible. This page should be merged back together with that draft (combining the edit histories), and then moved properly. The Transhumanist 19:54, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rename to Outline of Bible-related topics in the manner The Transhumanist suggests. That makes sense to me. (I also didn't know that page histories could be merged, so I've learned something today - always nice). Mortee (talk) 20:38, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(For further information, see Wikipedia:Moving a page#Fixing cut and paste moves) The Transhumanist 20:46, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm inclined to get behind Outline of Bible-related topics per The Transhumanist. Pinging Fayenatic london, Broter, and Ouro to further establish consensus. —Non-Dropframe _talk 20:49, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I support the renaming of the outline.--Broter (talk) 07:32, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in some form. As others have noted, this is a valuable study guide, and part of a set at Portal:Contents/Outlines. It might be better under another name, but I have no preference.
(BTW, I think that the nominator DrStrauss was completely wrong to describe this as an essay. A bare list of topics is not an essay.) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:39, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.