Contents

Talk:Wesleyan theology

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Christianity: Theology / Arminianism / Methodism / Evangelical Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by theology work group (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Arminianism (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by Methodism work group (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Evangelical Christianity (assessed as High-importance). Theology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Theology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Theology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TheologyWikipedia:WikiProject TheologyTemplate:WikiProject TheologyTheology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

[Untitled][edit]

As currently written (23 Apr 2012) the entirety of section 2.3 -- Development of Wesleyan Thought -- is a blatant violation of the NPOV policy.

Examples: "Unfortunately, many of these doctrines have been either lost or misdirected." "...many within the Wesleyan tradition have lost their social vision as well." "Unfortunately, many Methodists lost their social consciences and became defensive and ingrown during the late 1800s" "Wesley would be grieved to see good works become an end in themselves." "Admittedly, there might have been some improvements on Wesley's legacy, but much has been lost as well." "The Wesleyan emphasis upon holiness has been renewed in the work of many theologians to locate love as the core of holiness."

Please revise to a neutral POV or remove this section entirely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.80.169.13 (talk) 17:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article is unashamedly written like an advertisement from the point of view of Wesleyans from end to end. The article even periodically slips into the first person (e.g. subsection on "Wesleyan distinctives"). This article sorely needs rewriting with a neutral and encyclopedic tone, ideally with the attention of contributors from outside of the faith. --Meduka (talk) 15:26, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The result of the move request was: moved (closed by non-admin page mover) DannyS712 (talk) 19:50, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wesleyanism → Wesleyan theology – Attested to by sources within the article. A technical move request will be required. (WP:RMT) Hazhk (talk) 19:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC) --Hazhk (talk) 19:45, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the User:Hazhk's request. The article should be moved to Wesleyan theology. Thanks, Anupam^Talk 19:57, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Seems appropriate. Johnbod (talk) 21:22, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

There has been a user by the name Anupam editing this article with false perceptive link of Wesleyanism to Arminianism on matter unknown. Lutheranism, Calvinism and Arminianism are other 3 soteriology view prevalent among Protestant Christianity apart from Weleyanism. Please do not create a false impression by combining the two. If editing please provide evidence from any Sytematic Theology Text book or other academic journals where a subset of Wesleyan-Arminianism is defined. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.75.125.69 (talk • contribs) 17:15, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

116.75.125.69, per WP:BRD, your changes have been reverted on this article and you must gain consensus here to reinstate them. Anyone who is even slightly familiar with Christian theology would know that Wesleyan theology is also called Wesleyan-Arminian theology as reliable sources, such as this one, demonstrate. You absolutely cannot remove large chunks of information from the article, along with accompanying references, and then claim that there are no references to support the content. If you insist on continuing this tendentious behaviour, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia and be warned that you have already crossed WP:3RR, with at least two editors reverting your content blanking. Thanks for your understanding. With regards, Anupam^Talk 19:39, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly believe that this article could be improved by having both a background section (explaining the context and influence of arminianism) and then a development section (explaining the timeline of Wesley's writings on the subject as well as more modern discussions within Wesleyan churches). I'll start work on writing such a section soon. — Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. 12:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]