Talk:Church of the East in China

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Mandarin[edit]

The claim that the Nestorian Stele is "written in both Mandarin and Syriac" appears to be false, it would be odd for a text from this period to be written in "Mandarin". The text of the stele appears to be in Classical Chinese, confirmed by the Chinese Wikisource of the stele text.


Someone should really fix the page so it doesn't look like a giant wall 'o text. Just sayin'...

Done.--Danaman5 16:39, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


Nestorians = Hebrews or Assyrians?[edit]

"The Nestorians were largely of Hebrew extraction, tracing their lineage to those who did not return to Palestine following the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities. During the early centuries of Christian expansion, they considered the message of Jesus a fulfillment of their Jewish faith. Eventually, the Nestorians intermarried with other Syriac-speaking peoples east of the Euphrates and spread their faith throughout Turkestan, Mongolia, China and Japan." can someone please find a credible source for this... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malik Danno (talkcontribs) 04:21, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problem[edit]

Following on an OTRS complaint of copyright infringement in another article by a contributor who greatly expanded this article, it has been discovered that this article has been edited to include a liberal copy of at least one print source: Hoke, Donald E. (1975). The Church in Asia. Moody Press. ISBN 978-0-8024-1543-1.}. These are the edits in question. Examples include:

While the article has evolved since then, it still contains extensive content from those edits which will need to be removed or rewritten. The article has been listed at the copyright problems board to permit interested contributors an opportunity to rewrite the article to remove all content placed by this contributor or content that is modified from his contribution (as this will be a significant risk of constituting derivative work). It will be visited by an administrator after about a week. At that time, if no rewrite has been proposed, the section may be deleted or stubbed.

This is unfortunate, but our policies do not permit us to host content that has been previously published elsewhere unless we are able to verify that this content is public domain or compatibly licensed. This contributor has copied from multiple books, and there is no evidence at all that he did so with authorization. If this evidence is supplied, of course, the content can and will be restored. Given that in the first case the author protested, this may be unlikely.

See the contributor copyright investigation for more information and additional articles that are or may be affected. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:34, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Better...[edit]

Nope. Nestorian has the advantages of being shorter, less pompous, historically used, and perfectly accurate. To the extent people know about this church, it's by that name and there's nothing wrong with it either, the way there actually is with labeling the Ethiopians Monophysites. Read the relevant articles, which point out it's an issue of preference.

In any case, if you're restoring the archaic "Assyrian" or trying to make "Church of the East" sound like it's proper instead of advertizing, kindly don't use unsourced, incorrect, and peacocking language like what we had just now. — LlywelynII 18:42, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

You're not incorrect, but your edits introduced problems of their own: bolding blue links (twice) and adding two links to the same article. There's nothing wrong with saying "Nestorian Church", though it does bother some modern followers, but by the same token there's nothing at all wrong with "Church of the East". It's a widely used scholarly convention, for instance in David Wilmshurst's The Martyred Church – A History of the Church of the East. It's also where the main article is located, after substantial discussion. The article needs a lot of work; I'll take a stab at it as I have time.--Cúchullain t/c 20:38, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Material copied and adapted[edit]

I've replaced the former unsourced article with material copied and adapted from [[Dioceses of the Church of the East to 1318#China and Tibet, Dioceses of the Church of the East to 1318#China, and Dioceses of the Church of the East, 1318–1552#Collapse of the exterior provinces. I've also added a bit more from sources I can access. Perhaps User:Djwilms could have a look at it to make sure I haven't incorrectly represented anything. At any rate it's a good start.--Cúchullain t/c 22:24, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

About the Jingjiao manuscripts[edit]

Last year, I came across this Wikipedia page which, at the time, had an inaccurate description of the Jingjiao (Chinese Nestorian) manuscripts, claiming that dozens of the manuscripts had survived (actually, only a handful have survived). The inaccurate description had been copied by numerous other websites. I made a decision to return to this Wikipedia page someday to make corrections to its description of the manuscripts. But when I returned this month, I found that the entire paragraph on the Jingjiao manuscripts had been deleted. I considered giving up the idea of writing an improved description of the Jingjiao manuscripts, but I have decided that I should go ahead and do so. Since the deleted paragraph was the source of several other websites’ inaccurate description of the Jingjiao manuscripts, I would like to put an improved description of the manuscripts in place on this Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JingjiaoFan (talkcontribs) 12:36, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Church of the East in China. 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:

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

As of 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 {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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) 12:04, 7 August 2017 (UTC)