Talk:猶大福音

RFD discussion: August 2022–February 2023
Chinese. Not well-known enough. RcAlex36 (talk) 17:41, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 05:22, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Keep [see below] - notability isn't a criterion for inclusion, but this just seems SOP. Same goes for and . Theknightwho (talk) 15:49, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It would probably not be SOP because in Chinese it is extremely rare to encounter something like 馬太 on its own for the Gospel of Matthew, for example. However, it can be argued that 猶大福音 is not something to be included based on WT:NSE, although it is kind of murky. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 16:17, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I follow - I'm not saying the meaning of 猶大 on its own makes it SOP, but rather the combination of the name and 福音, which applies to every gospel. I might be misunderstanding what you meant by "on its own", though. Theknightwho (talk) 16:28, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm saying that something like 馬太福音 is not SoP because 馬太 by itself is not used usually to refer to the book of Matthew, so 猶大福音 would not SoP by analogy. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 17:14, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Right, but it is used to refer to the saint, which is the person whose gospel it is. Theknightwho (talk) 17:17, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, so are you suggesting that 馬太福音 is SoP (and should be deleted)? If not, I don't know how your argument would apply here. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 17:26, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I suppose so. I'm not fussed enough to nominate it. Theknightwho (talk) 17:30, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This would essentially mean that the (probably only) Chinese term for the Gospel of Matthew, etc., that Chinese (Protestant) Christians use should not be included. I'm not sure if I'd be on board with this reasoning for deletion. It's also not necessarily SoP in the sense that it's referring to a specific written text rather than any gospel account according to the Apostle Matthew. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 19:23, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Justinrleung For the sake of consistency, I'm going to change my own vote. I'm persuaded by your point that it isn't SOP, but I'm not in favour of notability thresholds, as I think that's covered by attestation. If we're going to invoke WT:NSE, I think that needs to be done on a per-class basis, which would entail deleting 馬太福音 as well. As we aren't, I don't think it should be applied to 猶大福音, either. Theknightwho (talk) 14:58, 9 September 2022 (UTC)


 * RFD kept (no consensus). — justin(r)leung { (t...) 05:04, 28 February 2023 (UTC)