Talk:Mennonites/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

POV check in the Types of Worship section

I called a POV check on some of the content in the Types of worship section for the following reasons:

1. ongoing attempts to soften the language referring to extreme excommunication and severe shunning to pander to positive Mennonite POV against the facts.
2. Refusal to discuss/consense on how to classify the Reformed Mennonites/Holdemans so that they fit the flow of the section. There are hundreds of churches that cannot be broken out this way. This section has classifications to condense hundreds or thousands of churches into a short section. For POV reasons (see discussions) some editors have broken these churches out separately and refuse to allow them to be classified as 'orthodox', 'fundamentalist', or anything else. No editor has offered other possible classifications despite many complaints on their parts and requests on my part to put up possible alternatives.
3. Refusal to include the Stauffer Mennonites as Old Order Mennonites despite Author Steven Scott's content the indicates they are Old Order Mennonites. Refusal to discuss/consense on how to handle this issue.
4. attempts to add the fundamentalist Reformed Mennonite/Stauffer churches to the See also section despite the fact that this is quite unfair to the hundreds or thousands of other distinct Mennonite churches that will never be listed there due to lack of space. This is I suspect a cunning attempt to try to eliminate mention of these orthodox/fundamentalist/literal-minded Mennonite churches in the article...the same way the mainstream Mormon Church refuses to discuss the embarrassingly extreme fundamentalist Mormons sects. Please see Where a Few Dare to Disobey [[1]] on why the mainstream Mormons might find the fundamentalists Mormons shameful. In similar, fashion although on less extreme basis Mennonites here might find the fundamentalist Mennonites shameful with good reason. However, this article is about all Mennonite 'faiths' which (unlike the Mormon faith) occurs in hundreds or thousands of distinct forms...so the full scope of Mennonite worship from (fundamentalist to progressive) belongs here.

For those editors who are unaware of the politics here, I will suggest possible POV concerns since other Mennonite/Mennonite friend editors refuse to discuss their POV concerns and instead act as if their concerns are about classfication/definitions alone. There is a sustained attempt in this article to ommit, soften, or misrepresent well-known historical Mennonite doctrines and traditions that some extreme churches use to discipline their members and that were a part of early Mennonite doctrinal confessions. Menno Simons the founder of the Mennonite faith was well known for his views on excommunication and shunning (including shunning by member-spouses of the excommunicant spouse) as the main method with which to keep his Mennonite church members from 'straying'. Most Mennonite churches today use mild to moderate forms of excommunication/shunning...often as covertly as possible so they can seem to be nice while being nasty (in God's name) to excommunicants. Some churches hold to the old practices and impose extreme excommunication and severe shunning on their members. Before I came to this page there was almost no mention at all of these key and distinctive forms of Mennonite discipline that go back almost 500 years and form the backbone of Mennonite sanctions against those who challenge a church's doctrine or who commit so-called sins against a church's code. Moderate Mennonites (a declining minority of Mennonites in North America) seem to find these old and ugly practices politically embarrassing as they bely the 'peace-people' image that all Mennonites try to (falsely) project to the outside world. I insist that this article show the full scope of Mennonite Worship, doctrines and traditions in complete, balanced NPOV minus pander politics that falsely show Mennonites as some kind of special 'peace' people who are nice to all people. Anacapa 05:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Just to state my position beforehand, I have no problem with facts, whether they flatter or not. I have more knowledge on Mennonite history than practice (other than with a couple of more progressive churches), so I've mostly been avoiding the section mentioned here, other than trying to skim for any (to me) obvious issues.

The only thing I might get involved in with the above statement is if opinions regarding the reasons for certain beliefs or practices get inserted. In other words: "who?", "what?", "when?", "where?", and "how?" are fair game, if relevant, but I will probably edit or revert when I notice people try to give an answer for "why?" That's just rarely appropriate for an encyclopedia article, IMO.

If I see it as informative, I'll do everything I can to make sure the information stays, and I'll try to be fair. Sxeptomaniac 06:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok let's begin by stating possible conflicts of interest here so that trust is possible. I have had terrible experiences with Mennonite shunning, character assassinations and other forms of relational, social, sexual and spiritual aggression. I know Mennonite totalitarian control methods all too well by now. I find it sad and ironically amusing to see shunning-style tactics used shamelessly against me here on wikipedia by at least one old Mennonite gangster (user RBJ.) However, I am able to separate human beings from the inane ideas they run around with when they claim a special highway to heaven. Therefore, I will do whatever I can to work with fair-minded editors who share their conflict of interests as well and who stick to NPOV facts where that is possible.

If you want to help us sort out this edit conflict I ask that you state your biases toward or against Mennonite worship and possible conflicts of interest you might have vis a vis Mennonites so we know what we are dealing with. I can easily do dialogue even when I disagree with you but I hate to be blindsided by people who refuse to own who they back here. I also ask that you reveal any other Mennonite and/or Mennonite-friendly editors who you might be working with so I can have some idea what I am up against. Last, I would hope that somewhere in the wiki commununity we could get help on tough questions from editors with NO Mennonite axes to grind either pro or con.

As for fair I appreciate that and I will also try to be fair as well. To me to be fair means to accurately conveying the content and the context with fair-minded criteria. I have tried hard to refrain from unfair or perjorative connotations and assocations in the content I have added throughout this article. However, I become legitimately outraged when fair connotations or associations are deleted, de-linked and fought over without facts to pander to some positive but false point of view about Mennonites here. I have fought to hard to free myself from Mennonite control to allow that to happen to me again here. I can work with anyone who seems sincere however and who calls out their conflicts of interest beforehand.

To me "why" is no less fair game than your other core questions above. Many other wiki articles I work on include causeality or "why" in context. The shunning article uses a whole bunch of bible quotes to justify shunning so I guess fair is fair here. I am not hung up on "why" but to me, it belongs here particularly where there are extreme or unusual traditions that make no sense to the average reader.

Please note, I added the progressive churches back because they are clearly a group of Mennonite churches with a separate type of worship. I pulled in one news article and I can pull in other should you need them. I am not sure of how many progressive churches there are or in what other ways they differ in worship from the Moderates but I sure someone in those churches could fill this in. Anacapa 04:32, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Progressive Churches

The issue of homosexually was the most visiable issue that let to exclusion of several progressive Mennonite churches in the US, but those churches' progressive "values" are much broader today than the sexual issue.

See [2] for a list of 8 points that most progressive Mennonites (and many modern Mennonite theologians would strongly agree with.) Would love to help with any other editing of these pages as I have time. Esmast 01:34, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Article neutrality

What is questionably neutral in the Mennonites article?

For a site that encompasses hundreds of thousands of people, we should probably discuss more about this subject. Any thoughts on changes format, content, or wording of this article?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hochstetler51 (talk • contribs) 13:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

If you are referring to the neutrality tag in the Worship, doctrine, and tradition section, read the POV of Types of Worship section (see the archive box above) to read the discussion of this. It certainly is time to clean it up. On a somewhat related note, I would like to see the whole "Further reading" section removed and individual entries added back if there is a consensus. If I recall correctly, bulk of that section was added about a year ago in an attempt to justify placing the article in the "Mind control" category and to skirt consensus on external links. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 00:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I am in the process of preparing to move and joing a conservative Mennonite church in NC. I will evaluate and edit the paragraphs on Conservative based on the information I have received in the last few months. There is a good book of doctrines by Kaufman that is widely used and accepted by the conservative mennonite churches. Also, I'm not sure if the word "pacifism" is applicable. I'll look it up and see if it really applies. The doctrines of Separation from the world and Nonresistance are definitely applicable though. NC_Creeper|3/1/07|

I would encourage a more balanced account of Mennonites and race. While I agree that early presence in Pennsylvania was consistent with Quaker activism around slavery, there were eventually racist practices among Mennonites in the East. For example there are storie and accounts of Mennonites being excommunicated because they married people of color (ex: whites marrying in the Native communities where they lived and worked in the Gulf states and upstate New York). Malinda E. Berry 16:35, 7 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malindaeb (talk • contribs)

Dancing?

I was trying to research specific rationale behind bans on such things as drinking and dancing, since both actions are supported biblically, but I don't know which sects ban dancing and why. Does anyone know why it's not allowed? --In Defense of the Artist 19:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I (a conservative Mennonite) could go on for quite a while on this! But I will just make a brief comment here. Dncing is looked down on for many reasons. modern Dancing is looked down on because of immodesty, showiness, and it is often inappropriate conduct between 2 people. It is also objectionable because it is a prideful act, not being done unto the glory of God. Also there are many things supported by the old testament that we do not believe are appropriate for the New Testament Church, many things done in temple worship are no longer done, because we no longer use temple worship but rather direct worship. I hope this answers your question to some extent. If not, I would suggest you search around at various conservative Mennonite (or ather cons. Anabaptist) sites online. Dbahler 01:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Original Sin?

According to the 1913 Webster dictionary, the Mennonites do not hold to the doctrine of original sin. Everything I've ever read about the core belief's of the denomination indicates that they do. If, however, Webster's is right, there should be some inclusion of the belief. 68.116.99.132 20:13, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

The doctrine of Original Sin is mostly incompatible with sects that believe in Believer's Baptism, as Mennonites do. Catholics in particular believe that infant baptism washes away original sin. Sxeptomaniac 00:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

That's a misunderstanding as most Baptists (including Anabaptist sects) believe and preach Original Sin and Believers baptism. Not all of them do, however. This is due to the influence of pre-destination doctrine on most Reformation theology.--207.68.249.150 (talk) 23:56, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I concur with the previous two comments. The dictionary isn't the only place that discusses this. The Mennonite Encyclopedia makes a similar observation. While there is an understanding of "original sin" it is not in Augustinian terms that require baptism during infancy. As we grow/age/mature we become responsible for our actions and choices in ways that we were not during an "age of innocence" (compared to reaching an "age of accountability"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malindaeb (talk • contribs) 16:39, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Doopsgezinden are Mennonites

Being new to the Wikipedia platform, I feel not entitled to change/edit a page.

The point is that in the Netherlands, the country of origin of Menno Simonsz, Mennonites identify themselves as 'Doopsgezinden'.

Although the word 'Doopsgezind' and its derivatives turn up in the course of the opening page, would somebody please include in the very first paragraph something like .... in the Netherlands known as 'Doopsgezinden'. . . . And put the words Doopsgezind , Doopsgezinden in the list of keywords for search engines. The Netherlands is the only country in the world with this exception to the rule (to my knowledge at least).

The reason for asking is the experience that many Mennonites visiting the Netherlands (or planning to visit) are not aware of this different identifier and do not find anything/anyone when searching phone directories etc. for 'Mennonite'.

Thanks in advance for this activity!

86.86.44.226 19:12, 9 May 2007 (UTC)Helmich

Actually, a similar article already exists at Mennonite Church in the Netherlands. I just linked both Doopsgezind and Doopsgezinden such that they lead directly to that article. Thanks for the info! In the future, feel free to be bold and try out some edits of your own. Don't feel too bad if they get reverted or if you get a couple warnings -- it happens to all of us when we're new. Just try to learn from your mistakes: Wikipedia is not too terribly complicated once you get yourself situated a little bit. You may wish to consider creating your own user account, too. Sláinte! --Bossi (talk ;; contribs) 00:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I changed your edit a bit to work it elsewhere in the article. Just to explain why: if we include a language translation up top, it could set a precedent for every other language's translation to likewise be added up top. Seeing as there is already a section regarding Mennonites in the Netherlands, that seemed to be a perfect fit to provide the translation. That way, it is a bit more defendable as not being a precedent should another user attempt to add another language's translation of Mennonite. Cheers! --Bossi (talk ;; contribs) 11:50, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

This last comment makes it worth noting that the mennonites in switzerland are not called mennonites either, but rather Taufgessinte, or Täufer (the old german names for the Anabaptists) -sorry if mispelled, just writing those off the top of my head Dbahler 01:10, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Progressive Churches

The issue of homosexually was the most visiable issue that led to exclusion of several progressive Mennonite churches in the US, but those churches' progressive "values" are much broader today than the sexual issue.

See [3] for a list of 8 points that most progressive Mennonites (and many modern Mennonite theologians would strongly agree with.)

209.108.197.62 15:25, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Jmbranum (talk) 04:59, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Pilgrims

John Smythe was not a Pilgrim; the Pilgrims weren't Baptists. Can anybody figure out what kernel of historical truth this section is alluding to? It's fairly misleading as it stands. 65.213.77.129 (talk) 14:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Good catch. It appears Smythe was attracted to the Mennonite church later in life, but if this had a direct influence on the separationists/Pilgrims, it's a little unclear. That paragraph and the one after it are pretty muddled, historically speaking. The Anabaptist influence on the early Baptist and Quaker movements are not known for certain, as it's unclear if there was a direct connection, or if similar beliefs were developed independently. The connection should probably be explored, but I think those paragraphs were just too mixed up. Sχeptomaniac^{χαιρετε} 22:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Population

1.5 million has to be low, there are more than that in the DROC and Ethiopia alone, let alone the rest of the world. Can we get some sourcing on that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.111.170.238 (talk) 21:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Shenandoah Valley

There is no mention in this article of the Mennonite community in the Shenandoah Valley around Harrisonburg, Virginia. There are both traditional and progressive churches in the area, and Eastern Mennonite University is in the northeastern part of Harrisonburg. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.4.0.253 (talk) 00:48, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Shenandoah Valley Mennonites are indeed a common influence in the "Valley". There are 3 other sects in the Shenandoah Valley: Most conservative, they are: "Old Order Mennonites" (horse and buggy,recently with electricity, some without plumbing inside their homes) ; "Black Bumper" or Whistlers, (Black vehicles, no tv or radio in the home; Conservative Menn modest dress, very limited tv; Liberal Mennonites ; women can cut their hair, not wear a "covering" bonnet and can be pastors. Few rules on divorce or remmarrige --75.196.108.223 (talk) 13:52, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Hospitals?

Perhaps there should be some mention of the hospitals founded by the Mennonites. Hospital Menonita (Mennonite General Hospital) in Puerto Rico comes to mind. 71.93.238.60 (talk) 18:41, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

The Mennonites found a lot of things. Community centres, thrift stores, fair trade stores, specific volunteer organizations etc. Perhaps a better idea would be a more broad paragraph on other endeavours/organizations founded by the Mennonites.CoupleKlonopin (talk) 17:50, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Excellent idea. 68.116.99.227 (talk) 17:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Schools

Recently the "Schools" section was tagged as POV without explanation. The section does need work. The whole topic of education is mentioned but not really covered in the article. The "Schools" section is a minor subtopic of the bigger picture, and in my opinion, doesn't even merit a footnote in a well-developed article. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 00:01, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with this. While some mention of schools is probably good, the Quebec dispute is too specific in time and place for this article. I'll remove it if nobody objects. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:00, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I would object to removing the Quebec dispute entirely. Conflicts between Mennonites and Amish and other small religious groups have been frequent, and deserve inclusion in Wikipedia. Perhaps this information should be elsewhere, though. --DThomsen8 (talk) 15:08, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I added a list of US high schools affiliated with the Mennonite Church USA, but obviously this is an incomplete list as there may be Mennonite high schools affiliated with other churches, and I am not listing any elementary or middle schools at all. --DThomsen8 (talk) 15:08, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

The Mennonite Schools website will be useful to update this list because there are a number of high schools missing from it. Malinda E. Berry 16:30, 7 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malindaeb (talk • contribs)

Whistler Mennonites

I live in an area rich in Mennonite history and would like to add more to the "Worship, doctrine and tradition" section, particularly regarding Whistler Mennonites. My only concern is that I have not heard much of this particular tradition outside of my area and I wonder if it is even worth mentioning them. If anyone has any particular insight into this tradition, feel free to contact me. Kehrbykid (talk) 21:58, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Limited Technological use

It seems that the article is written implying that Mennonites are known to be ones who don't keep up with modern technology. I myself had no knowledge of Mennonites before reading the article and i'm still not clear on this issue. It seems there needs to be a section or more details on their limited technological use. Any one know much about their use of technology? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.246.32.205 (talk) 20:17, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what part of the article you find confusing. The Worship, doctrine, and tradition section explains that modern Mennonite groups have no restrictions on technology, but that others, such as Old Order Mennonites, do. It could do with some cleaning up, I know, so let us know exactly where you found the article ambiguous. Sχeptomaniac^{χαιρετε} 17:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

We do have, and use cell phones, computers, ect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.166.127.150 (talk) 17:31, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes we do, but the point is that some old order Mennonites have chosen to avoid much modern technology. Are you saying that you're a member of an old order Mennonite colony who allow the use of mobile phones and computers? If you are, perhaps you could identify the colony as a point of contrast. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:45, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Help needed on Wenger Mennonites.

I recently read that Wenger Mennonites are the religious group with highest birth rate in USA. Where can I find more information about them? Is there a wiki article?? Axxn (talk) 13:54, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

I believe the section that discusses "Old Order" or "Horse and Buggy" Mennonites covers the Wenger Mennonites. I don't know this for sure, so I'm hesitant to edit the article to reflect that until I can get a good source, but [this article] would seem to support that conclusion. There is also a wiki article on Old Order Mennonites, although the article does not mention the term Wenger Mennonites specifically. --Anietor (talk) 19:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

They are officially known as Groffdale Conference Mennonite Church and I tracked down a number for their annual growth rate: 3.7%, doubling every 19 years! ✤ JonHarder ^talk 03:19, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

So there is a wiki article about the group. Thanks for pointing out. Axxn (talk) 18:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually, JonHarder did more than point out the article...he created it, along with a redirect from Wenger Mennonite! Good job, JonHarder! --Anietor (talk) 21:35, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Jon... Axxn (talk) 17:42, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Horrible infobox

Wow, now that is a gaudy infobox. Couldn't miss it if you gouged your eyes out. Why such a bright neon box, and on this of all articles? Were the regular plain modest boxes considered too fitting for this article subject? And it really is an awful colour combo besides. 74.137.111.179 (talk) 22:14, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

It seems that someone "rv" the colors in Template:Infobox Religious group Tedickey (talk) 23:47, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

If there is no objection I will fix that Mattlandis (talk) 04:01, 17 November 2008 (UTC)mattlandis

Section on: Worship, doctrine, and tradition

This section lists different groupings of mennonites (which I think is good and many are interested in this) but it includes both specific denominations and groupings of denominations. It seems to me that it should either be all groupings of denominations or all denominations unless a denomination is in its own grouping. What do others think? If there is agreement I could work on correcting this and would have some printed sources I could add. Mattlandis (talk) 03:57, 17 November 2008 (UTC)mattlandis

Hutterites not mentioned

Another Anabaptist group which was closely associated with the Mennonites, The Hutterites aren't mentioned. They emigrated to Paraguay and North America in the late 19th century after having lived on Mennonite lands in Russia, as I understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Landroo (talk • contribs) 03:14, December 18, 2008

Hutterites are Anabaptists, but they don't have a lot of direct interaction with Mennonites, as far as I'm aware (from what I understand, they tend to keep to themselves, much like the Amish, as their communes are pretty self-sufficient). As a result, it isn't too necessary to mention them here, beyond the "see also" section. They are brought up in the Anabaptist article, which covers both groups. Sχeptomaniac^{χαιρετε} 17:21, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

The above are accurate observations, excepting the comment regarding communal living. The Amish do not generally hold resources in community, though there is much sharing of larger tasks (barn-raising) and certain larger and smaller farm or household equipment. The Hutterites do hold land and equipment in common. The largest settlement is in South Dakota. Please see my addition to the resources below regarding GAMEO (Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online) It can be considered as a most accurate resource, as it is compiled by Mennonite scholars, themselves. homebuilding 75.37.229.129 (talk) 16:41, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Mennonite Disaster Service

Any thoughts about creating a seperate Mennonite Disaster Service article and linking it to this article? It might be of some interest. 66.191.19.68 (talk) 00:21, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Regions with significant populations

Perhaps a better source is needed to avoid disputes over which countries have significant populations Tedickey (talk) 22:25, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

The mwc-cmm.org site is probably the best site for currency and accessibility. The Zimbabwe Brethren in Christ figures can be verified at the bottom of http://www.mwc-cmm.org/Directory/2006africa.pdf . In general, I don't care for a long laundry lists of countries. Can we cut it off at three, or five or at the most ten? ✤ JonHarder ^talk 23:19, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Ten would be an improvement, though in the current list, 10 and 11 are close together, but much smaller than 9 (did I make any other mistakes in the list?). That's for absolute sizes. Looking at the percentage of total population might give a different rule than considering cutting it off at 9. Tedickey (talk) 10:22, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Further Reading?

Any thoughts on adding a 'Further Reading' section? I can think of a number of great texts that would be valuable to the reader. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 03:56, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

My preference is texts that are general in nature, that cover the topic as a whole and avoid covering a specific organization or group. The article is already skewed toward North America, so keeping to general texts shouldn't contribute to that problem. There was a further reading section at one time, but it was added with a biased intent, and, as I recall, I removed the whole thing after things had blown over. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 20:44, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. Agree that any section should be of general history and theological texts. Books oriented toward particular denomination(s) or regions would best be left to the Wiki articles that cover them in more detail. Surv1v4l1st ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 02:21, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Founder?

The article has read Peaceful Anabaptists for a while. I agree with a recent edit that indicates that it's Menno Simons, but wouldn't want it to change without discussion. Which is it? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

This was

• originally Menno Simons
• then Swiss Brethren, with edit summary "attribution to Menno Simons as "Founder" is unhistorical"[4]
• then Peaceful Anabaptists, a change I made, not aware of this earlier history[5]

I suppose the problem here is that Menno Simons was a leader of something that he did not start. A relevant quote from Smith:

“ Menno Simons, it will be observed, was not the founder of a new church, but merely the leader, perhaps the most influential leader, during a critical period of a movement already well under way. … The term Mennist was first used, as noted elsewhere, by Countess Anna of East Friesland in 1544 as a term distinguishing the peaceful from the revolutionary Anabaptist parties. ” — C. Henry Smith, Smith's Story of the Mennonites, p. 72

This corroborates the earlier switch away from listing Menno Simons as founder. It is clear that we can say the movement is "named after" Menno Simons, but we get tripped up with "founder." I would like to hear more thoughts on this. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 12:02, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I suspected that you would have the answer. Thank you for the clarification and all your hard work on the article. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:59, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

What about United Mennonites?

There's lots on the Mennonite Bretheren but what about the United Mennonites. We split from the Bretheren a long time ago and though our core beleifs are the same we are not as strict on things like dancing and drinking among other things. If your from the northern part of the Niagara region in Ontario you'll probably know that we don't get along to well. There are about 5-7 U.M. churches between Niagara-on-the-Lake, St. Catharines, Jordan and Vineland alone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.121.249.49 (talk) 12:44, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

You should consider doing it. Just grab a user ID, so it doesn't look like you're vandalizing the page, and then add whatever you feel should be written. Other editors will attempt to improve your content by redacting or enhancing as required. I suggest using Firefox for editing since it spell-checks as you write. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:28, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Baptized into

The phrase "almost every infant born in Western Europe was baptized into the Roman Catholic Church" (emphasis mine) is correct. Being baptized in a church would be if it was in a specific building. The concept is that you are baptized into the denomination, not just a building. Prior to being baptized, you were outside of The Church. Once you're baptized you're in The Church. The process, they would say sacrament, is that of bringing the infant from outside into The Church. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:48, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

This is *not* correct at all and your arguments are completely false theologically. People are baptised into Christ and so become members of the "church" as the Body of Christ - *not* into any particular institutional form of the church. Your wording is unacceptable and will be reverted. There is also a clear and obvious grammatical difference between being being "baptized in the Roman Catholic Church" and being "baptized in Roman Catholic churches". The phrasing "baptized into the Roman Catholic Church" is erroneous and my correction of it has nothing to do with buildings. Afterwriting (talk) 04:38, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

You are both correct and incorrect. The Greek only states that people are baptized into Christ and by extension into the church. The wording is the way that any denominational group would consider it and definitely the way the Roman Catholics would see it. The phrasing "baptized in the Roman Catholic Church" is erroneous and more importantly ignorant. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:10, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

And please stop undoing my edit. It removes incorrect double spaces after periods. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:16, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

One thing further: how many editors reviewed that wording and found it to be correct. Now you have a bee in your bonnet that it's incorrect (which in itself is an error) and you won't let it go. Let's leave it the way it was, using into, and let another editor make the call. In the meantime, I'll look for sources after church. I suggest you do the same. We can present them here for all to decide. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:16, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

What's with all this "please stop undoing my edit" nonsense?! You don't own this article and you are acting like some sort of bully. Your behaviour is offensive and unacceptable. Afterwriting (talk) 05:28, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

It's not nonsense. The edit contains two distinct changes. The first changes are the in/into section. The second is the spaces, which you're undoing along with the first. Your behaviour shows a disregard for others and is even more unacceptable. Had you taken the time to read the whole sentence, you would have seen the entire context. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:45, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Can't sleep. Here are a few sources: (all emphasis is mine)

* http://www.mennolink.org/doc/cof/art.11.html "Believers are baptized into Christ and his body". Also http://www.mennolink.org/doc/cof/summary.html

* http://members.cox.net/smharder/my_book/c4.htm "In those churches infants were baptized into the faith".

* http://books.google.ca/books?id=mIbC0aPUNSMC&lpg=PA170&ots=U0N0hzCyEt&dq=%22baptized%20into%22%20Mennonite&pg=PA170#v=onepage&q=%22baptized%20into%22%20Mennonite&f=false "A year later he was baptized into the (Old) Mennonite Church"

* http://www.urbana.org/msearch/agencies/mennonite-missions/overview "and be baptized into the Mennonite Church"

* http://www.treatsfromthe45thparallel.com/Amish%20information.htm "just as those who live the plain lifestyle but are not baptized into the Amish Church" (emphasis mine).

* http://www.gameo.org/encyclopedia/contents/south_union_mennonite_church "This group was baptized into a Mennonite church" also http://www.gameo.org/encyclopedia/contents/U86.html "whose wife and son Jan had been baptized into the church"

* http://www.mhsbc.com/20061117/Ewert.htm "when believers are baptized into the body of Christ" and http://www.mhsbc.com/news/v11n02/v11n01p06.htm "He was baptized into the MB church in 1901".

also

* http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090225114406AA0hTPM

* http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2065/is_1-2_54/ai_87425977/

* http://www.dance.net/topic/7691852/1/Religion/Being-Baptized-into-Catholic.html&replies=9

* http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_do_you_get_baptized_into_a_Catholic_Church

I could go on but I've made my point.

On the other hand, a Google search of "baptized in" reveals a lot of "baptized in water", "baptized in blood", "baptized in fire", and "baptize in the name..." but I didn't see any official writing on "baptized in {insert denomination}".

One thing further, if you change this here, you'll also have to change the Amish article as well, where this phrase also appears. Twice. I'm sure it's in many other articles of many other denominations. I'm just not as familiar with them. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:45, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Afterwriting, I think you are making the mistake of applying a theological understand that does not apply universally, and certainly was not commonly accepted in that historical period. Baptisms still are not recognized as valid across all denominations, so it most certainly is correct to say someone was baptized into a particular church/denomination, and was even more true at that time. Sχeptomaniac^{χαιρετε} 15:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Further to that, as you know some Roman Catholics don't even think of themselves as a denomination. They believe that they are The Church and all others emanate, or are a sect of, or are not to be considered (depending on who the author or speaker is) of the church. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:37, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

After a month, the editor has returned with no proof. Only opinion. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:34, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I also prefer the "into" wording. I think we can call it a consensus and hopefully move on. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 21:26, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

how many Mennonite denominations are there?

From this article, I calculate there must be more than 50 but how many more? The top ten = 991,000 of 1,500,000 and so 509,000 Mennonites belong to groups of less than 11,000 each. Is there a list of these groups? Nitpyck (talk) 08:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Confusing paragraph

In the North America section under the heading "Sexuality, marriage, and family mores" there is a very out of place paragraph that starts "Some of these expelled congregations were dually affiliated with the Mennonite Church and the General Conference Mennonite Church, the latter of which did not act to expel the same congregations." There is no mention of any expelled congregations in this section and the paragraph is orphaned and meaningless as it stands. Looks like sloppy editing, but I can't figure out where the paragraph should be. Is it left over from a previous edit (where a preceding paragraph would have given context), or was it moved from another section to its current location by accident? 206.125.64.19 (talk) 03:20, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Article Poorty Written and Organized

This article is poorly written and organized. It shows signs of sloppy editing. There's often verb tense disagreement, information buried in subordinate clauses, lost referents and orphaned ideas. In key sections, the organization of paragraphs seems basically random. Can someone from the WikiProject Christianity suggest a template which can be used to help organize the information in this entry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.56.35 (talk) 22:17, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Examples? Specifics? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Sentence in the sexuality section...

There's a section in the sexuality section that reads

The Brethren Mennonite Council for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) interests is putting forward its views about homosexuality within Mennonite and Brethren churches, as well as providing support for LGBT people within the Anabaptist tradition.

It doesn't say what, exactly those views are. Anyone know what those ideas are? --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 18:48, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Food

What foods did mennonites eat? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.179.18.91 (talk) 20:07, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that there should be a section on Mennonite cuisine? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:08, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

OR?

Just noticed we got tagged with the OR template. This requires discussion. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:16, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

North American bias

Once again we see that this article mostly shuns the history of Mennonites in other countries such as Australia where you will find: The Mennonite Church of Hope, The Australian Christian Brotherhood. Why on earth do we have to put up with anabaptist articles though are mostly American orientated. It is getting quite annoying getting an American history lesson when we read about anabaptism!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.239.73.11 (talk) 01:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

So fix it: Thank you for your suggestion. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). ✤ JonHarder ^talk 21:22, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the North American bias. Also, there is a lot of Mennonite Church USA type bias--for example you'd hardly know the Old Colony Mennonites exist, although they are probably one of the largest groups. This article in many places feels like "Moderate Mennonites" are the norm, and others are a minority. There are probably about equal numbers of horse and buggy (old orders, Old Colony, etc.) and conservatives as there are "Moderates"---and the "moderates" are in decline in numbers. Conservative and old order groups preserve what has been Mennonite for most of Mennonite history. I don't want an article biased the other way, but this article as it currently stands does not present an accurate picture of what being a Mennonite has been about for most of Mennonite history. It also doesn't present a balanced view of what being a Mennonite is about for hundreds of thousands of members and millions of non-member children around the world. Also, it needs complete reorganization and a coherent outline. It's written like a collection of clippings.204.42.21.114 (talk) 00:10, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

I would also like to comment that most Mennonites are unpatriotic in the U.S.A., believing that should not pay any sort of respect for those who have given them their freedom of religion in this country. I would suggest, that this real fact be inserted into this article. Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.164.187 (talk) 14:49, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Not sure what you're talking about. You'll have to elaborate. I know that Mennonites will not participate in military service, but that's not unpatriotic. And many Mennonites don't believe in pledging allegiance to the state, since their allegiance is to God alone. I don't think that could be called unpatriotic either. So please explain what you mean. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:02, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I would say that Anabaptists are patriotic toward the kingdom of heaven, but unpatriotic toward the kingdoms of this world like the US, Australia, etc. Mennonites would not say that they don't refuse to pay respect to those who have given freedom of religion to them, because that freedom is the gift of God and not men.Brechbill123 (talk) 22:21, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Would it make sense to spin off the sections on North American Mennonites into its own article, in the same sense that there are currently separate pages for Russian Mennonites, Mennonites in Bolivia, Mennonites in France, Mennonites in Mexico, Mennonites in Paraguay? Even the section on different Mennonite groups (i.e. the range of practice among groups) are primarily North American categories that wouldn't fit elsewhere, such as contemporary Mennonite Churches in Europe or Africa. Is this article a general overview of global Mennonites or is it using a North American centric definition for "Mennonite?" --Szdfan (talk) 22:30, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Possibly, but the reason there's a North American bias is that the predominant language in the US and Canada is English, and this is the English Wikipedia, and editors write what they know. The problem I foresee is that the various Mennonite groups in North America are not as coherent as the others. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:48, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Picture

This is probably just a trivial thing but do you think we could find a better first picture for this article than the map of the spread of Anabaptism? With some of Facebook's updates this image is now the one that appears in my profile next to "religious views" (it links back to Wikipedia). It would be nice if the lead image of the article was somewhat more representative of my (our) faith. ClixTrek (talk) 01:17, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Pannabacker

Pardon me, but you cite a man at the bottom named "Pannabacker." I was wondering: what is his full name? and what is the name of the book you cite from?

Thank you in advance.

64.124.146.70 (talk) 19:24, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Probably William Pannapacker. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:34, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

No, this refers to this book in the section "References and further reading": Pannabecker, Samuel Floyd (1975), Open Doors: A History of the General Conference Mennonite Church, Faith and Life Press. ISBN 0-87303-636-0. Name misspelled in the citation in Notes. I would fix but I'm a newbie who can't figure out how to fix a "reflist". Cataobh (talk) 22:29, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Scroll down to the section and click edit. If you don't have section editing, check your preferences to see how you have it turned on or follow this link. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:11, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

My instructions were spartan but you seem to have made it work. Congratulations. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:04, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! What confused me was that references in the Notes section are fixed in the main text, not in Notes. Learned something new! Cataobh (talk) 00:18, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Gentlemen, thank you for your assistance. Your quick response to my question was brilliant. I cannot thank you enough for your help in that clarification. Keep up the good work, gents!

74.95.255.197 (talk) 03:29, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Unclear

Under "Fragmentation" the phrase "this group" is used. It is not clear which group is being referred to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.194.200 (talk) 15:10, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Also, "these expelled congregations" are mentioned, although they have not been mentioned for a long time before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.194.200 (talk) 15:14, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

All this creates an air of disjointedness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.194.200 (talk) 15:16, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Do you mean disjointed in the same way that you wrote three unsigned comments above? Feel free to make the material flow more smoothly, but don't try to create new subject headings arbitrarily as you did here. That doesn't help anything to flow more smoothly. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:48, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Education

Why do the Mennonites find Quebec's prescribed school curriculum unacceptable? This section doesn't make much sense without knowing that so a request, please, for it be detailed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.51.125.17 (talk) 12:00, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

GC versus MC

I agree with many of the concerns raised above about the bias of this page toward North American moderate Mennonites. This bias has removed clarity as it treats MC as synonymous with THE Mennonite denomination when in fact there are many denominations. As a stop-gap measure, I've added sub-headings above the preexisting paragraphs about MC and GC and a heading about Alternative Service directly below them to clarify that that is not simply a GC phenomenon.

Any other ideas about how best to clarify without losing the simplicity that is wonderful about Wikipedia?

Of course then it is also important to standardize how we refer to the Mennonite Church (is it "old", (old), or just (MC)?). I almost wonder whether it would be best to create a separate Mennonites in North America page separate from the MC USA page?

--I neglected to sign my name, apologies, MrsSimons (talk) 21:02, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

It's my understanding that Mennonite is one denomination with several conferences. I can't answer your question though. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:08, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

promotion of minor population in Uruguay

The given source makes it pretty clear that the population in Uruguay is smaller than any of the other populations listed in the infobox. A comparable WP:RS is requested to warrant the promotion of Uruguay above other populations. The inbody source referred to in the change log appears to be someone's marginal source TEDickey (talk) 16:13, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Looking at babelfish's translation of [6], there's nothing specific regarding the number of people in Uruguay, hence nothing to differ from the infobox's low-population figure. In previous discussions, the low-populations have been left out of the infobox; otherwise the list would be several times longer TEDickey (talk) 16:29, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Try http://oldsite.mwc-cmm.org/Directory/worldmap2003.pdf --Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:31, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I did that before I reverted the edit. 1230 for Uruguay. 19,000 for Mexico. Reading across the map, my impression is that Uruguay's population figure is somewhere in the bottom 10% of all of the figures, and less than a quarter are listed in the infobox. TEDickey (talk) 16:38, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

By the way, the text opposite the infobox makes a claim about Ethiopia which contradicts the source for the infobox. But reading further, it is also questionable since it ultimately refers to Meserete Kristos Church, which appears to refer to a wider group than addressed in this topic. TEDickey (talk) 16:51, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Of course, that source is MB only. There may be other Mennonite congregations listed. I don't think it would be a problem to remove it, but it would be ideal to have an MCC number. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:29, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

agreed (a more recent source than the 2003 map would be nice in more than one way). TEDickey (talk) 21:43, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Mennonites and Hitler Germany

from what i read most german mennonites embraced hitler when he came into power in january 1933. a declaration by the conference of the east- and west preussian mennonites from sept. 10, 1933, stated "the deep thankfulness for the great ascertainment God has presented to our people through You [Hitler]". the religion felt supported by the nazi ideology of "blut und boden" (blood and soil) and arian superiority. as to pacifism: many mennonites served voluntarily as soldiers in WW I and II. the church's doctrine obviously was not as radically pacifistic as in the previous century. also, mennonites were among killers of jews in concentration camps.

lots of sources can be found about this; one of the best overviews (in german) probably being this. i wonder why this has not found a place in this article yet. Maximilian (talk) 23:20, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

As long as you have reliable sources, then you're welcome to add it, but make it balanced (include Christian Neff's opposition as well). --Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:23, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Mennonite page edit - add of United Mennonite Education Institute

I did some searching, and the school added seems legit. Their website: http://www.umei.on.ca/ and it's listed on http://www.mennoniteschools.org/php/schools/index_flash.php Curious your reason for undoing the edit. Do you know how to determine why the wikipedia page for the school was removed a few years ago? The create page for it indicates that it was removed back in 2006: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_Mennonite_Educational_Institute&action=edit&redlink=1
BenHochstedler (talk) 12:16, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

The location indicates

This page has been deleted. The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference.

2006-04-05T08:12:06 Alex Bakharev (Talk | contribs) deleted page United Mennonite Educational Institute (a8)

The Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion indicates that A8 is a superseded criteria for blatant copyright infringements. It would now fall under G12. That means if you have an original article, ie, not a copy of some existing website, you could recreate it. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:49, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

title of article

Why isn't the article just called "Mennonism"? Why is it referred to as "the Mennonites" throughout the article instead of Mennonism? Charles35 (talk) 19:22, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I suspect because it's not just about the beliefs of the group but also about the people. Whereas similar articles with "ism" is about the movement. Also, I have never seen the term "Mennonism" so I don't know that we would want to use such a neologism. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:13, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Many ethnic groups

The statement that Mennonites are "both an ethnic group and a religious denomination" is not true. Many Mennonites today are african (see Third Way Cafe:Where are Mennonites located throughout the world? and The Mennonite)), "in the global Mennonite family people of color now comprise the majority of members" and "nearly 20 percent of Mennonites in the United States are Hispanic, African-American or Asian" (see Third Way Cafe:Who are the Mennonites?). It is no longer the case that all Mennonites are of European background (see Mennonite Historical Society of Canada). So it makes no sense to describe Mennonites as an "ethnic group" (and we are not only talking about Old Colony- or Old Order Mennonites - but all Mennonites ! ). The mennonite denomination consists of many different ethnicities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mennojan (talk • contribs) 07:32, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

You're misreading the statement. They are both an ethic group and they are a religious denomination. Some happen to be both, but the statement supports what you say. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 08:23, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

My point is that Mennonites cannot be both an ethnic group and a religious denomination. Sure - many Mennonites have a swiss, german, russian-german or netherlandic background, but most of them are african, hispanic or asian. And the common ground of the Mennonites is their religious convictions - and not their ethnic origins! In case of some groups as f.x. the Old Order Mennonites we can -maybe- describe this group also as an ethnic group (because of their swiss- and southern-german origins), but the majority of the Mennonites has many different ethnic origins - so we cannot state that Mennonites are (also) an ethnic group - Mennonites consists of many different ethnic groups ! Anything else would be more than mistakable. --Mennojan (talk) 10:35, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Your point is incorrect though. They can be both. My cousins are ethnic Mennonites. They eat farmer sausage. They participate in many traditional events and consume the food. They do not practice the religious practices. My children are religious Mennonites. The consider themselves ethnic Germans (my father's side of the family) and Scots (my wife's side of the family). My aunt is angry that stores sell "Mennonite farmer sausage" and "Mennonite rye bred" when the MCC doesn't get any money for it.

I have encountered Mennonites from India, where there are more Mennonite Brethren than any other country in the world. So I do understand your point.

Your recent changes make your point and retain the previous referenced material. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:15, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

No. In order for it to be an ethnic group, every person must share the common ethnic background. You cannot "join" an ethnic group. You are only born into it. You hypothetically have the ability to "become" a Mennonite, even if they refuse to accept you. If you are white, you cannot "become" a black person. It's just impossible. Many Mennonites might be part of a common ethnic background (much like the Jews). For example, the three main ethnic groups of the Jewish religion are Ashkenazi Jews, Sephardi Jews, and Mizrahi Jews. Charles35 (talk) 18:54, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: I understand your point of view, even though I would always state that mennonitism is (only) a religious denomination - based on common religious beliefs and practices. So I would deny that someone, who alone has for instance a mennonite family background or cultural connections with german Mennonites, could be described as mennonite. But I have changed the text so both sides are mentioned. kind regards, --Mennojan (talk) 19:15, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

And traditional Mennonites do have a common background. However, as a religious movement, they have reached into other ethic groups. So anyone who was a Mennonite prior to 1945, is both an ethnic and religious Mennonite. After that point, they started to do mission work around the planet and they are now both an ethnic group (referring to that group prior to 1945) and a religious denomination. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:30, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I have understood you and I know the mennonite history too - but have just another opinion on this point. Traditional Mennonites can maybe described also as an ethnic group (even if I would prefer to described them as people with german, russian-german or netherlandic origins, maybe with a separate cultural identity). But Mennonites today consists of many different ethnicities. Mennonites can be traditional pennsylvania-german, but also african, hispanic, asian, french, netherlandic and so on. The common ground between all these mennonite groups are not their ethnicity, but their religious convictions. But (as I wrote) I also have changed the text so both sides are mentioned, regards, --Mennojan (talk) 21:15, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually I don't think it is accurate that all pre-1945 Mennonites were both ethnic and religious Mennonites. See [7], also see [8] --Jmbranum (talk) 18:56, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

LGBT affirming congregation discipline citations needed

Here is a page which has what looks to be a chronology of congregation disciplines, but its sources look like information directly from people in the congregations / conferences, and not from an unbiased source: http://www.lamarfreed.net/shame.html BenHochstedler (talk) 18:38, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Significant digits in population size?

The article seems to claim that there are exactly 1616126 Mennonites, which seems somewhat absurdly exact. Unless I am misinterpreting it, that should probably be corrected. 85.225.252.101 (talk) 17:26, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Good point, and I have addressed the fallacy. MWC had apparently published a new directory with population stats soon after I had made the update using the 2009 map last year. BenHochstedler (talk) 18:03, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

MDS reference in introduction

The paragraph about MDS in the introduction section seems out of place. The following paragaraph related, and seems appropriate for the intro, but I'm thinking it would be better to create a Service Agencies subsection under North America to better cover the connection with MDS, MCC and other agencies that are not tied soley to MC USA. BenHochstedler (talk) 18:09, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Controversy section

This (the sexual assault controversy) might have been current in 2011, but I think it is hardly topical, or even particularly notable. No Mennonite church condones these actions and no evidence is given for a general trend toward violence or sexual assault in Mennonite communities; as far as I can tell, the fact that the eight men involved were Mennonite is completely tangential. I see no reason for this section to continue to exist. I await correction. 2601:A:1C80:176:BEAE:C5FF:FE70:99AA (talk) 13:27, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

I would agree. Incidents of this nature (well, the method was a bit unique, but I am referring to sexual predation in general) happen in all types of groups, religious and non-religious. I suppose it stands out here because of the generally high moral standards of the Mennonites in general. I also have serious doubts about it being a "Controversy." Mikeatnip (talk) 03:09, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

I am the anon user above. I deleted the section in question. Perhaps there is somewhere else this belongs instead; I see it is already in Mennonites in Bolivia, although it hardly seems more appropriate there. 2601:A:1C80:176:BEAE:C5FF:FE70:99AA (talk) 20:54, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

A part of the Holy Roman Empire

" Friesland (at that time, a part of the Holy Roman Empire)" I do not think so, to the best of my knowledge it was part of the Netherlands partially occupied by the Spanish empire. (The Romans never made it into Friesland the got stuck south of the main rivers in the Netherlands) Rob de Koter — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:7900:3D3:FCAA:DECA:FC59:451C (talk) 04:00, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

1. There's a difference between the Roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire.
2. The Roman occupation of Frisia began in 12 BC.
3. The Burgundian Circle, which included the region, was created as part of the Holy Roman Empire in 1512. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:13, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

The article even links to Holy Roman Empire! Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:19, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

North America/Canada

In the North America section, this article says very little about the large Mennonite population in Canada. It mistakenly says that the majority of Canadian Mennonites came from the US, which may be true of the Ontario populations listed here (I don't actually know) but is not true of the larger and, from the point of view of national impact, probably more significant Manitoba population. When I get some time I may try to fix this, though I'm not an expert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.25.163.136 (talk) 15:47, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

There are three main populations of Mennonites in Canada. Those who came to Ontario did so primarily from Pennsylvania. Those who came to Manitoba and British Columbia did so directly from Russia and later as refugees after WWII, although the BC Mennonites also arrived from migration from withing Canada. There are other pockets of settlements but those are the three main ones. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:16, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Better infobox?

Surveying various Christian denomination's pages, none of them have an infobox like the Mennonite one that I could find. Seems like this page's is more for conveying info related to ethnicity than for religion. If someone has the time to figure out if there is a standard one for Christian denominations, I think it would be worth doing the work to replace it with that if it provides useful standard information for people learning about various Christian groups.

I removed the list of languages from the current infobox just now because 1) it was incomplete: didn't list some of the languages spoken by African Mennonites (if not other places), and 2) misleading because a fact on languages spoken by those who call themselves Mennonite has much more importance *historically* than it does on defining who Mennonites are today. If there is disagreement with #2, I'd still argue the benefit of maintaining the list of languages does not seem worthwhile as the list of countries provides similar, if not more important information.

BenHochstedler (talk) 17:41, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Ignore my first paragraph above. See next topic regarding Infobox

BenHochstedler (talk) 23:08, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Infobox

You keep reverting Mennonite back to "Infobox religious group". Yet Lutheranism has no Infobox -- "religious group" or otherwise. This makes no sense that I can see, and is certainly not constructive. -tahc ^chat 01:40, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

WP:NPA states, "comment on content, not on the contributor."

This is not about a religious group but rather a socio-ethnic group who are associated by a religious leader's name and religious principles. There are many denominations that are part of those who are Mennonites and some who are now secular. It's not appropriate. And even if you could prove that it was a religious group, as I showed Lutheranism, but there's also Anglicanism, Presbyterianism, Methodism, Pentecostalism, Baptists, Adventism, Eastern Orthodox Church, Eastern Catholic Churches and Oriental Orthodoxy—; none of which use the denomination infbox. I don't see how this applies to this article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:39, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

First, Mennonites are a type of religious group. Mennonites are part of the free church movement that emphasize personal choice in being part of the church, in contrast to the state churches of the Magisterial Reformation that "baptize" infants in a way that implies being born into the church. While the article shows Mennonites almost only in the very conservative dress, many or most Mennonites wear modern dress.

Second, if you want to claim Mennonites are not a religious group-- then your reverts (to Infobox religious group) do not fit your claimed view.

Third, if you can decide which is your view-- then you still need a reliable source to support such a claim. It is otherwise merely your opinion. tahc ^chat 02:10, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

You'll need a RS to support that the article about this socio-ethnic group is about a single denomination, which is what you're claiming. There are many denominations that trace their heritage back to Mennonite religious foundations and this article describes all of them. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I think that the concept of some Mennonite groups not being religious is an important point for the article to make. Perhaps there are statements in it that suggest it, but I couldn't find an explicit statement. The word "secular" does not show up. There was not a mention of groups that do not "practice" Christianity. I just made an edit to adjust the wording of the introduction to the section Organization worldwide. Perhaps this is inline with Walter's rationale. I suspect there may have been edits made in the past that have been on this same aspect, but I didn't take the time to research that. BenHochstedler (talk) 23:36, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

My point is that there are many conferences, or theological divisions, among (between) Mennonites. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:53, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

No. I am not claming Mennonites are a single denomination.

Mennonite is a denominational family, just as Anglicanism, Presbyterianism, Methodism, Pentecostalism, and Baptists are denominational families.

While denominations have a particular leader and organization, denominational families (normally) do not have a particular leader and organization. Denominational families are still religious groups, not socio-ethnic groups. No one ever tries to catagorize Anglicans as a socio-ethnic group, even thought "Anglican" means "English". tahc ^chat 06:42, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Yet you decided to replace the infobox with an infobox to indicate that it is a single denomination. I reverted again as there is no consensus to make it one. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:18, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

You are not making any sense.

I have told you Mennonites are not a single denomination, so I could not have done anything "to indicate that it is a single denomination"-- yet something I did with the infobox indicates a single denomination to you. Please tell us (in good faith):

(1) What makes you think my edits are related to the idea of all Mennonites being a single denomination?

(2) For that matter, how would it even matter to anything if all Mennonites were a single denomination? tahc ^chat 01:39, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

I am making perfect sense but I'm not the one whose actions need to be explained. You need to explain why you feel it necessary to change the {{Infobox religious group}}, which is currently present and was present before you started changing it, to {{Infobox religion}} when Mennonites are not a religion but a religious group. I assert that doing so makes it seem that it is a single, unified "religion" rather than a group. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:12, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Am trying to help us understand each other and the terms we are using, not just "explain" actions.

So based on you comments, you seem to be think that a particular church group (e.g. MCUSA) with an organization to it, (a denomination) is a "religion" and may use the {{Infobox religion}}; but that a group of such groups with a shared tradition and history, but with no one organization, (a denominational family) is less like a "religion" and only a "religious group" and may use the {{Infobox religious group}}.

I'll ask you to confirm or clarify this, if you may, before comment further. tahc ^chat 06:32, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Answer the question. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:18, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

In this context, I will point to a former discussion on this page ([9]). As I stated there consists the Mennonites of many different ethnicities, the common ground for the Mennonite denomination(s) are common religious convictions, not the ethnic origin. --Mennojan (talk) 20:56, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

But this is not an article about a religion but an ethno-religous movement. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:16, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

This is an article about Mennonites - and Mennonites consists of many different ethnicities! I'm mennonite, because I decided to be mennonite - not because of my ethnicity! --Mennojan (talk) 21:32, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to the fold. Read the article. It's about the etho-religious group known as Mennonites. It's not about the various denominations or conferences that identify themselves as Mennonite. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:00, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Walter is wrong. This article is about Mennonites as denominational family. The're not one etho-religious group anymore than they are one denominational conference. tahc ^chat 03:37, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Since you agree that they are not a single denominational conference, that should settle the matter. Changing from {{Infobox religious group}} to {{Infobox religion}} would state that very thing. {{Infobox Christian denomination}} is simply a redirect to Infobox religion. That is what that template is for. To point a finer point on the issue, the following articles use Infobox Christian denomination (or Infobox religion): Mennonite Church Canada , Mennonite Church USA, Canadian Conference of Mennonite Brethren Churches, Conservative Mennonites, Markham-Waterloo Mennonite Conference. I certainly don't want to move to {{Infobox ethnic group}}. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:19, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

No one never claimed Mennonites were a single denominational conference.

The names are the infoboxes are completely arbitrary-- arbitrary in that we can name and rename infoboxes anything for which there is consensus. The names only need be useful to identify and to recall their suitable purpose(s). If there is no infobox designed exactly for what an article is, any suitable infobox can be used. Names of the infobox types used are not part of Wikipedia content because readers never see them names of the infobox types; only editors see this. tahc ^chat 04:42, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

The way that that infobox is used is the key and using the one you want implies that it is a single denominational conference. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:39, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

There wasn't more information. Since this is about both ethnic group, stating that conferences are associations is wrong. At least aid organizations is helpful but indicating that they separated from the Magisterial reformers is misleading as they were never really a part of them. The worst part is naming Simons as a founder. That was a key consensus discussion when I started watching this article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:46, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Infobox 2

Is there anyone out there who is willing to work together toward a consensus, and able to read and write normal English? tahc ^chat 22:28, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

OH pick me. I read and write normal English! Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:18, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on Mennonite. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121026003722/http://www.becketfund.org/index.php/article/701.html to http://www.becketfund.org/index.php/article/701.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150412022330/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/freeheadlines/LAC/20070904/MENNONITE04/national/National to http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/freeheadlines/LAC/20070904/MENNONITE04/national/National
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130513061527/http://www.gameo.org/encyclopedia/contents/M3685.html to http://www.gameo.org/encyclopedia/contents/m3685.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140413140459/http://www.cnn.com/us/9711/05/gay.mennonite/ to http://www.cnn.com/us/9711/05/gay.mennonite/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130729055115/http://www.mennoweekly.org/OCTOBER/10-18-04/ETHIOPIA10-18.html to http://www.mennoweekly.org/OCTOBER/10-18-04/ETHIOPIA10-18.html
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.hshs.mb.ca/mennonite_old_colony_vision.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070927014327/http://www.gameo.org/index.asp?content=http://www.gameo.org/encyclopedia/contents/O533ME.html to http://www.gameo.org/index.asp?content=http://www.gameo.org/encyclopedia/contents/O533ME.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:30, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Partially checked. Updates by BenHochstedler (talk) 02:48, 11 April 2016 (UTC) :

• becketfund.org - wayback article did not work; removed associated content from article
• gameo.org article on Mankes-Zernike - replaced wayback ref with current gameo.org article url

• cnn.com article on Germantown Mennonite - updated with a wayback ref that works

BenHochstedler (talk) 03:11, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mennonite. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cnn.com/us/9711/05/gay.mennonite/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:15, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Including other groups?

It seems to me, that beside lacking sufficient citations, this article is also lacking breadth. The largest group of Mennonites worldwide - The Mennonite Brethren - are scarcely mentioned. Another small, more 'evangelical' group, which split from the more institutional General Conference - the Fellowship of Evangelical Bible Churches (FEBC)/Evangelical Mennonite Brethren (EMB) is not mentioned at all. Is anyone tracking with my concerns about this? I would like to work on including both. Jsniessen (talk) 20:46, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

I agree. It felt like an omission to me as well, but I don't have sources. How would you suggest addressing the issue? Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:37, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Walter - It will take some thought and work... I would like to add a couple paragraphs on both these groups. I have sources and can supply a summary of both these groups (although I'm sure there are others not represented). My question is where to do so.

I find the overall organization of the article a bit confusing. For instance, other major groups are discussed under the main header "North America", so it could go there, but I don't really understand why this section is called North America since no other continent is singled out this way. It leaves me with an expectation that other continents will be addressed in a like manner. The North America section seems to have become a catch-all for a bunch of topics - history, group and denomination descriptions, schism and division, lists of schools, etc. plus a section on Sexuality, marriage, and family mores thrown in even though it doesn't seem to be North America-specific. Another spot where the groups/denominations are discussed is under the "Worship, Doctrine, and Tradition" header. )A third potential spot would be under the "Membership" header category for North America.)

As I write this, I think perhaps the North America section should and perhaps was originally intended to be history of Mennonites in North America and has been expanded into it's current form by numerous additions. It should probably be retitled, with content such as "Sexuality, marriage, and family mores" moved elsewhere (under either Worship Doctrine and Tradition or Theology?). Perhaps the "Schools" subsection could be it's own section entitled education (and possibly include an introduction to include the emphasis of Christian education in Ukraine, Christopher Dock, etc. What do you think of listing the denomination history - including MB and FEBC/EMB - under a retitled "North America" section, called something like "History in North America"? We could use some of the specific group/denomination history from the "Worship, Doctrine, and Tradition", reserving that section for descriptions of specific practices and distinctives of the various groups.

That's a lot to chew on and I'm still processing how to organize and improve this. Please weigh in with your suggestions.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Mennonite. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.multiculturalcanada.ca/ecp/content/mennonites.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081005125238/http://www.ambs.edu/ljohns/H%26MC.htm to http://www.ambs.edu/LJohns/H%26MC.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140529050944/http://www.themennonite.org/issues/12-17/articles/Southeast_Conference_removes_ministerial_credential to http://www.themennonite.org/issues/12-17/articles/Southeast_Conference_removes_ministerial_credential
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130729044057/http://www.mennoworld.org/2012/5/28/central-district-takes-2-part-action-pastors-crede/ to http://www.mennoworld.org/2012/5/28/central-district-takes-2-part-action-pastors-crede/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140618152332/http://www.themennonite.org/issues/14-9/articles/Decision_not_to_discipline_pastor_stands_at_WDC to http://www.themennonite.org/issues/14-9/articles/Decision_not_to_discipline_pastor_stands_at_WDC
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gameo.org/index.asp?content=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gameo.org%2Fencyclopedia%2Fcontents%2FO533ME.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060203202348/http://www.mwc-cmm.org/Directory/index.htm to http://www.mwc-cmm.org/Directory/index.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:26, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Mennonite. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20120801065414/http://www.galizien.org/de/galizien/27-mennoniten-in-galizien/28--aus-montevideo-galizische-mennoniten-in-uruguay.html?showall=1 to http://www.galizien.org/de/galizien/27-mennoniten-in-galizien/28--aus-montevideo-galizische-mennoniten-in-uruguay.html?showall=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121114173329/https://www.dot7.state.pa.us/ce_imagery/phmc_scans/H001090_01H.pdf to https://www.dot7.state.pa.us/ce_imagery/phmc_scans/H001090_01H.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130729045030/http://www.mennoworld.org/2012/11/26/eastern-district-cuts-ties-germantown-church/ to http://www.mennoworld.org/2012/11/26/eastern-district-cuts-ties-germantown-church/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130130192332/http://www.themennonite.org/issues/15-7/articles/Western_District_amends_one_resolution_tables_another to http://www.themennonite.org/issues/15-7/articles/Western_District_amends_one_resolution_tables_another
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070529210000/http://www.mcusa-archives.org/library/resolutions/1995/index.html to http://www.mcusa-archives.org/library/resolutions/1995/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070513145148/http://conciliationserv.mennonite.net/ to http://conciliationserv.mennonite.net/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150108072014/http://www.mcusa-archives.org/resources/membership.html to http://www.mcusa-archives.org/Resources/membership.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:27, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Mennonite. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20070516094344/http://www.multiculturalcanada.ca/ecp/content/mennonites.html to http://www.multiculturalcanada.ca/ecp/content/mennonites.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150924112819/http://www.taeufergeschichte.net/index.php?id=altkolonier_mennoniten_in_belize to http://www.taeufergeschichte.net/index.php?id=altkolonier_mennoniten_in_belize
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121109125147/http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=8aa6f3f4-45fd-42d3-ad45-38b1106bddfc to http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=8aa6f3f4-45fd-42d3-ad45-38b1106bddfc
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120428185957/http://www.mennoniten.de/deutschland.html to http://www.mennoniten.de/deutschland.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.swissmennonite.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 8 May 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 00:05, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

---

Mennonite → Mennonites – Per WP:PLURAL, articles on people groups should use the plural form in the article title. Rreagan007 (talk) 06:24, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

• Support move, but a redirect is fine as it's both cheap and common. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:31, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
• Support per nom. - - mathmitch7 ^{(talk/contribs)} 22:17, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
• Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:10, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
• Support per Necrothesp & mathmitch7 --J04n(talk page) 17:19, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
• Support per nom. - Darlig  ^{Talk to me} 15:01, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Fair use rationale for File:MC-logo.gif

File:MC-logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a non-free use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

-- Marchjuly (talk) 01:54, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Poland

A number of Mennonites settled in Poland, first in independent one and later in Austrian division. Xx236 (talk) 08:13, 18 September 2019 (UTC) West Prussia was formed in 1773, so the link is incorrect.Xx236 (talk) 08:16, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Research centers can be very helpful to our readers

There are a handful of major Mennonite research centers & museums online. A link to three of them will be of help to readers who will learn where they can email or visit for specialized help. I have visited some and their staffs really want to be helpful. The links fit the Talk:Mennonites/Link guidelines Rjensen (talk) 13:24, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

No, they completely miss WP:EL, which it defers to. The key principle is: "some acceptable links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy." So by adding that many links, it misses the "some" aspect out of the gate. Many of them (a history of Menno Simons for instance) miss the target as there's a bio on Simons where that may be appropriate, and this isn't it. You added hobby sites, libraries (which I considered, but it wasn't immediately obvious how to find details). Could you explain how the sources that meet EL? Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:30, 14 February 2020 (UTC)