Talk:Sing Praises to Jehovah
Online versions[edit]
I suggest the links to jwbrothers to be put away. Maybe just a link to the audio page on the website should be included. Summer Song (talk) 16:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
'Christian service'[edit]
I have removed the wording: "are about all aspects of Christian service". The term 'Christian' is too broad for this assertion. I vaguely recall that this wording may be from a JW publication, with the implication that '(only) JW=Christian' (to the exclusion of 'Christendom'). Obviously JW songs will not relate to aspects of other branches of Christianity that have different beliefs.--Jeffro77 (talk) 03:08, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Versions of songs[edit]
I suggest the removal of the unofficial versions of the Kingdom songs that can be found here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sing_Praises_to_Jehovah Since official versions are mentionid now, I feel we better use them alone. Summer Song (talk) 06:36, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Redirect?[edit]
Most of the material here has been copied to the section of a consolidation article, entitled Jehovah's_Witnesses_publications_for_adherents#Sing_Praises_to_Jehovah.
Suggest redirect there. --AuthorityTam (talk) 20:18, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- Other than the non-notable track listing, the entire article content is duplicated at the other article. Redirecting per AuthorityTam.--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Track listing[edit]
Please explain why the entire track listing is notable or it will be deleted. Most hymnal articles do not provide an exhaustive track listing.--Jeffro77 (talk) 01:00, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
- No response in four weeks, ergo removed.--Jeffro77 (talk) 05:37, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
- I find the removal of this without discussion highly bothersome. While there was no discussion in four weeks, it was likely because no one even knew this was an issue. The fact that other articles don't do it is not a sufficient enough reason to remove an entire referenced section of obvious connection to the article's topic. (1) It's pertinence to the article cannot be disputed--it's a listing of the songs, much like the tracklisting on a album article, and (2) you haven't provided a reason to remove it, which I, otherwise, would be happy to consider and discuss. Your notability argument, to me, doesn't really make any sense. What is a "notable" track listing? The notability of this list can't be separated from the book. The tracklisting IS the book. I am going to reinstate the list, pending further discussion.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 02:20, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
- The track listing is essentially a table of contents. Unlike an album list, which generally list songs that have some degree of notability in mainstream media, none of the tracks has any encyclopaedic notability of its own, and most articles about religious hymnals do not include a track listing. It's obvious that you became aware of the removal of the track listing shortly after it was removed, so there seems no good reason why you couldn't have discussed in the 4 weeks in between if there was some compelling reason for retaining it, rather than just complaining after the fact (which I also consider "highly bothersome"). You have still not provided any reason for retaining the listing.--Jeffro77 (talk) 05:51, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
- In case the originally stated reason for removing the track listing is still not clear to you, it is specifically that the listing is not notable, and therefore constitutes undue weight.--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:04, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
- I find the removal of this without discussion highly bothersome. While there was no discussion in four weeks, it was likely because no one even knew this was an issue. The fact that other articles don't do it is not a sufficient enough reason to remove an entire referenced section of obvious connection to the article's topic. (1) It's pertinence to the article cannot be disputed--it's a listing of the songs, much like the tracklisting on a album article, and (2) you haven't provided a reason to remove it, which I, otherwise, would be happy to consider and discuss. Your notability argument, to me, doesn't really make any sense. What is a "notable" track listing? The notability of this list can't be separated from the book. The tracklisting IS the book. I am going to reinstate the list, pending further discussion.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 02:20, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Links to jw.org[edit]
An anonymous editor stated that links to jw.org may not be used without asking permission. The terms of use of jw.org do not indicate any restrictions at all regarding linking to the website.--Jeffro77 (talk) 03:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)