Talk:Private revelation

Untitled

This is an article I imported from the Catholic Encyclopedia which I understand is not a violation of copyright law. I am in the process of editing the article to update its information and wikify it. Vaquero100 23:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

To avoid confusion and possibly deletion tags, in the future you may want to make sure that a) the article is tagged regarding its origins (in this case Template:Catholic and b) wikify, format, remove POV etc BEFORE starting the article. I'd suggest working on it in a txt file or wordprocessor of choice, or starting a subpage in the user namespace (i.e. User:Vaquero100/Private revelation). This way, editors won't see a huge block of unformated, unwikified text with langauge and POV issues that usually causes them to panic and speedy or AfD tag the article. The downside with this option is that you don't have other editors working on the conversion. Another option would be to have a subpage either on the Catholic project page, or the Catholic Encyclopedia project page (lets call it /conversion or something) where editors can have one or two articles the group can work on, and once they are ready to go live, only then start the new article in the main namespace, and move another article in the conversion queue). Anyway, the main point is that you should convert the article BEFORE uploading, instead of simply copying and pasting (as the Wikipedia:Catholic Encyclopedia topics page clearly warns you against doing).--Andrew c 01:50, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

New Tags

I changed the tags for the following reasons. The original basis of cleanup appears to have been accomplished, however, the article is lacking proper structure according to WP:Layout. Also, the article does read like a how to. Understandable since it was copied from another source, but a little bit of conversion to sentences instead of steps could probably solve this. --Infero Veritas (talk) 16:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Almost a year later

A year later in July 2009, the article is in need of major changes, and needs a semi-rewrite. I will try to clan up over the next 30 days. It still has many errors as well as many unjustified statements, e.g. the most important private revelation was at Lourdes? Who measures these and by what instrumentation or measurement? If pilgrims are a measure, Our Lady of Guadalupe gets more of them. Anyway, needs major rewrite. History2007 (talk) 05:45, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

2017

There's a huge spectrum of opinion about this topic in the Catholic Church that can't be brushed aside by one or other quote that looks more like advocacy than objectivity. Relevant here is the Catechism statement that private revelations help people live more fully by fundamental revelation "in a certain period of history." Jzsj (talk) 21:24, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Catholic

Let's be real, this is an exclusively Catholic article. It's quite narrowly about Catholic doctrine per the Catechism. The E. Orthodox doctrine is rather anti- private revelation (see Prelest), and sources do not conform to the thesis of private revelation being a universal Christian notion. Should some changes be made to the prose to accord for this? Pinging FyzixFighter —Alalch E. 21:16, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

@Alalch E.: Thanks for the ping. I think there could be a rationale for adding a section on private/personal revelation as found in the Latter Day Saint/Mormon traditions. For example, see Continuous revelation#Personal versus church-wide revelation and Revelation in Mormonism#Personal revelation. It fits the general definition divine message to God to an individual not intended or binding to the world/church as a whole. I'm not certain if there is a similar theological concept in Protestant denominations. --FyzixFighter (talk) 21:23, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. Want to add a short h2 section about private/personal revelation in the Latter Day Saint/Mormon traditions to the article, with the appropriate links / main hatnotes? —Alalch E. 21:28, 17 January 2023 (UTC)