Talk:Bible translations into Latin

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bible Mid‑importance

	Bible portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible 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.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Latin Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Latin 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.LatinWikipedia:WikiProject LatinTemplate:WikiProject LatinLatin articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contested deletion edit

Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

This page should not be speedy deleted because... it isn't short --In ictu oculi (talk) 05:54, 5 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm going to remove the CSD tag now that the article is starting to make a bit more sense, but I think you might want to think about changing the title and it could probably still use some more context. I'll check back in a few days, thanks! N^oformation ^Talk 06:31, 5 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

FWIW, I think that the title is apt and descriptive. The article's biggest flaw is that it is too short and should be expanded, not deleted. It points out the verity that the Latin Vulgate is not the only Latin bible in the world, it just seems like it is. Rwflammang (talk) 23:35, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

The title is, like Bible translations into Irish etc., one of the spinouts of the umbrella article Bible translations by language. It already has been expanded from the very short text on the original list. But certainly, more could be done. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:25, 20 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

content is completely false edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This content comes from a group of people who deny fossils because it doesn't fit their world view. This " Though there is no certain evidence of a pre-Christian Latin translation of the Hebrew Bible, some scholars have suggested that Jewish congregations in Rome and the Western part of the Roman Empire may have used Latin translations of fragments of the Hebrew Bible.[1]" needs to double verifiable evidence; not an opinion. An opinion is not fact.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.67.151.244 (talk • contribs)

See WP:NOTTRUTH. Veverve (talk) 15:43, 11 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Add topic