Talk:Grant Hardy

BLP reads more like an essay than an encyclopedic treatment of the person in question(?)

I actually have not put any of my own thoughts or feelings into the blp that i am aware, but have indeed cited others' opinions. (For example, I personally prefer philosophical Buddhism and find Abrahamic religions light on believability, but I'd hoped my ideological stance would not seeped into my treatment of Hardy this student and sometimes proponent of Mormonism.) That said, User:StartTerminal, I'm open to any improvements.

Could it be that your observation is slightly itself skewed, owing to the fact that apologetics has become more and more ghettoized in the academy? -- I'll check out e.g. C. S. Lewis's Wikibio and return.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 00:31, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

1. From its lede: "Lewis's faith profoundly affected his work, and his wartime radio broadcasts on the subject of Christianity brought him wide acclaim."
2. Lewis's time in England: "Various critics have suggested that it was Lewis's dismay over sectarian conflict in his native Belfast which led him to eventually adopt such an ecumenical brand of Christianity.[25] As one critic has said, Lewis "repeatedly extolled the virtues of all branches of the Christian faith, emphasising a need for unity among Christians around what the Catholic writer G. K. Chesterton called 'Mere Christianity', the core doctrinal beliefs that all denominations share".[26] On the other hand, Paul Stevens of the University of Toronto has written that "Lewis's mere Christianity masked many of the political prejudices of an old-fashioned Ulster Protestant, a native of middle-class Belfast for whom British withdrawal from Northern Ireland even in the 1950s and 1960s was unthinkable."[27]
3. Subsection "Return to Christianity": "He eventually returned to Christianity, having been influenced by arguments with his Oxford colleague and Christian friend J. R. R. Tolkien, whom he seems to have met for the first time on 11 May 1926, and the book The Everlasting Man by G. K. Chesterton. Lewis vigorously resisted conversion, noting that he was brought into Christianity like a prodigal, "kicking, struggling, resentful, and darting his eyes in every direction for a chance to escape".[39] He described his last struggle in Surprised by Joy: [Lengthy quote].
4. [And on and on].
5. Then there's this w/in the wikibio for J. D. Salinger: "Salinger wrote friends of a momentous change in his life in 1952, after several years of practicing Zen Buddhism, while reading The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna about Hindu religious teacher Sri Ramakrishna.[77] He became an adherent of Ramakrishna's Advaita Vedanta Hinduism, which advocated celibacy for those seeking enlightenment, and detachment from human responsibilities such as family.[78][79] Salinger's religious studies were reflected in some of his writing. The story "Teddy" features a ten-year-old child who expresses Vedantic insights.[80] He also studied the writings of Ramakrishna's disciple Vivekananda;"--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 00:46, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
6. Another interesting B.M. scholar is Elizabeth Fenton, who teaches the University of Vermont graduate seminar "The Book of Mormon and its World"^{Elizabeth Fenton (2016). "Review: Understanding the Book of Mormon". Journal of Book of Mormon Studiess. 25 (1): 48. "The Book of Mormon Gets the Literary Treatment | Religion & Politics". Religionandpolitics.org. 2016-01-19.} In both the first and second citations just given there's a cool tale where Dr. Fenton submitted a literary analysis of the B.M. to a journal and one of the anonymous peer reviewer's comments simply dismissed the B.M. as being inappropriate for serious study.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 04:23, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Comment: This article is written like a personal reflection or opinion essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings about a topic. Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style. (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

? startTerminal

Comment: Needs to meet WP:PROF or WP:AUTHOR and does not appear to meet PROF at this point. Legacypac (talk) 04:14, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

The subject is a notable author-scholar within the subdiscipline of B. of M. studies. (The article itself demonstrates how he passes wp:PROF #1 and #9. Here's some citations--> J. Frederick. "The Bible, Mormon Scripture, and the Rhetoric of Allusivity - 9781611479065 - Rowman & Littlefield". Rowman.com. Retrieved 2018-04-19."Google Scholar". Scholar.google.com. 1919-11-30. Retrieved 2018-04-19."Journal of Book of Mormon Studies | All Journals | Brigham Young University". Scholarsarchive.byu.edu. Retrieved 2018-04-19.)--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 04:41, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Comment: See: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grant Hardy Using B.M. must be a Mormon in thing - as a non-Mormon I find it confusing jargon. Legacypac (talk) 02:13, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Good input, user:Legacypac. It can be changed. I'd perhaps made it up and have no idea what the established shorthand might be, if there is one.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 04:12, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

An AfD does not hold in perpetuity. As evidence of a perhaps blatant ghettoization of religion studies on WP, there seems to be a systemic pattern of AfD closings' failure to discount mere reflex !voting that neglects to specify any argumentation at all, while giving the starkly specious argumentation of say a single !voter who does, with the coup de gras being even to bypass the basic premise of closings that lack of consensus within an AfD's argumentation defaults to keep. (That is: the contention from the 2011 AfD that the subject didn't "pass wp:PROF" was not a WP:GOODARG. (1) wp:PROF iself says when an prospective subject is an academic writer whose works have been the subject of multiple reviews, the person is considered notable. (2) wp:PROF itself says it does not supersede wp:GNG, which in turn says that a prospective subject need pass the hurdle of its having received non-trivial coverage in reliable sources.)--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 20:26, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

No need for AfC

The creator is free to move the page when they are ready. AfC is optional for established editors. Legacypac (talk) 20:32, 24 April 2018 (UTC)