Talk:Seven deadly sins
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Seven deadly sins article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 12 months ![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Mixed-up Sources
When navigating to the source of [Seven deadly sins#cite ref-1 37-0|Dorothy L. Sayer's thoughts on wrath]], the source number of [Seven deadly sins#cite note-:1-37|37]is that of (Landau, Ronnie (30 October 2010). The Seven deadly Sins: A companion. ISBN 978-1-4457-3227-5.) The true source of Sayer's quote is from the source number of[Seven deadly sins#cite note-DLSintro652-22|22],which is placed just under the heading of Historical Views [[Seven deadly sins#cite ref-DLSintro652 22-0|here]. [[User:Armadyx|Armadyx[[User talk:Armadyx|talk]19:40, 30 April 2023
Islam
Who on Earth thought it was at all helpful to muddy the waters of an already muddy pool by introducing a corresponding list of deadly sins in Islam? Catholicism was muddying its own pool quite well enough by itself, thanks. At the very least, that person ought to have linked shirk to the Wiki article [Shirk (Islam)];ever-forgetful that there already is an English verb to shirk. As it adds nothing but confusion to the article (which apart from this deals exclusively with moral science from a Judaeo-Christian perspective), I'm partial to the notion of deleting the reference entirely; however, I'll withhold my damp sponge from the blackboard to see what others may think of it. Nuttyskin (talk) 21:41, 10 July 2024
"Moving pictures"
In the introduction section, it says the concept of the Seven Deadly Sins has found its way "into the streams of religious and philosophical thought, fine art painting, and popular culture, including literature and new forms of media such as moving pictures and digital streaming." Is "moving pictures" really necessary here? Perhaps I'm unfamiliar with the Wikipedia style guide for such topics, but that seems unnatural, convoluted, and pretentious. It also compromises the reader's ability to quickly digest and comprehend this information in the way that an introduction section should for an article. [User:Jtwooz|Jtwooz] ([User talk:twooz|talk) 02:38, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- This entire post does not answer the question and is completely ofd track. It's a mess. 96.42.102.65 (User talk:96.42.102.65|talk) 10:56, 10 January 2025
- ... what? Jtwooz (User talk:Jtwooz|talk) 20:45, 27 January 2025
Start a discussion about improving the Seven deadly sins page
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve the "Seven deadly sins" page.
- C-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in Philosophy and religion
- C-Class vital articles in Philosophy and religion
- C-Class Philosophy articles
- High-importance Philosophy articles
- C-Class ethics articles
- High-importance ethics articles
- Ethics task force articles
- C-Class Christianity articles
- Mid-importance Christianity articles
- WikiProject Christianity articles
- C-Class Religion articles
- Mid-importance Religion articles
- WikiProject Religion articles
- C-Class Islam-related articles
- Mid-importance Islam-related articles
- WikiProject Islam articles