Talk:religious naturalism

religious naturalism
Encyclopedic subject matter. Candidate for. DCDuring TALK 09:23, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That's not what really matters. The question is, is this just naturalism of a religious nature. And frankly from the unhelpful definition, I'm not sure. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:13, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Is spiritual naturalism by the same contributor in the same boat? There is also religious naturalist (and spiritual naturalist). bd2412 T 18:38, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * There's something in the UK called the Plain English Campaign, and this is exactly the sort of thing they'd hate. We need a decent definition before we can decide if it's SoP, or just delete it. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:58, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Then delete all four. bd2412 T 01:54, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep the entry; whether the definition is correct is another question. It does not seem to be a semantic sum of parts. "Encyclopedic subject matter" is an invalid reason for deletion of an entry with a definition. Entries similar in some regards include dialectical materialism, logical atomism, moral objectivism, transcendental idealism, subjective idealism (redlink), and logical positivism (redlink). The claim (made by no one so far) that the term is a semantics sum of parts can be reviewed if some evidence for the claim is presented. It is not clear why "naturalism" is not already an encyclopedic subject matter, and whether we want to delete "naturalism" per "encyclopedic subject matter". Interestingly, shows several dictionaries, while  only shows Wikipedia. Nonetheless, the argument of "encyclopedic subject matter" would probably also apply to "dialectical materialism". --Dan Polansky 11:49, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Kept for no consensus to delete.--Jusjih 06:09, 28 June 2011 (UTC)