Untitled edit

The identification of Islam traditionalism with Sunni Islam may well be contentious - I have no position, it is simply that Traditionalism (Islam) is currently a redirect page leading to Sunni Islam. Robina Fox 11:27, 13 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Radical traditionalism edit

Pope John Paul's encyclical "Fides et Ratio" specifically mentions Radical Traditionalism as a philosophy which, like Fideism, is an error because of its "distrust of reason's natural capacities". This disambiguation page directs "Radical Traditionalism" to a page about the journal Tyr, which seems completely irrelevant.Ifdef (talk) 19:25, 28 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Religious traditionalism protected? edit

I found that as well as for Catholic traditionalism as well as for Islamic traditionalism there are two articles each, which clearly should be united:

Example for the Catholic article: It starts saying that it is only about traditional forms like liturgy, but then goes on with traditional teachings which is the topic of the other article. I have the strong feeling that the topic of traditionalism is subject to evil influence by interested parties in Wikipedia, be it Catholicism or Islam or any other religion. They want to show traditionalism as something harmless, so they create articles which claim that traditionalism would be only about forms, but later in the same articles they come along with their real agenda. The real agenda of religious traditionalism is always the same in all religions: Rejection of reason in favour of traditon. Therefore, the concept of traditonalism is today widely used for all religions in all times. Therefore, there should be an article Traditionalism (religion). --IbnTufail (talk) 21:42, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add a link to Silent Generation? edit

I'm seeing this as an alternate name for the Silent Generation a lot and it's not on the disambig page. Should I be bold and add it myself or wait for discussion? T3h 1337 b0y 20:08, 28 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Since we can't have citations in disambiguation pages, you should first make sure it's properly sourced as an alternative designation in the main article, which it doesn't appear to be. Eperoton (talk) 00:50, 29 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

"Tradtitionalists" listed at Redirects for discussion edit

  An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Tradtitionalists and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 21#Tradtitionalists until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 18:01, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply