Template:Did you know nominations/Evangelism Explosion

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Round symbols for illustrating comments about the DYK nomination The following is an archived discussion of Evangelism Explosion's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you knowDYK comment symbol (talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.

The result was: promoted by Carabinieri (talk) 00:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC).

Evangelism Explosion[edit]

(
)

Created by StAnselm (talk). Self nom at 04:21, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

  • Hi. Question. The source calls it "perhaps the most widely used", rather than "the most widely used." I wonder whether that doesn't call for a revision to the hook.--Epeefleche (talk) 19:07, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Oh, that's right. I think I used the word "suggested" in the main body of the article. Yes, it should go in there. StAnselm (talk) 19:37, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Alt is good to go; everything checks out.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:03, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Generally, I don't think "...has been described as..." hooks are appropriate, unless the opinion of the one describing is an authority of some kind on the topic. But if that is the case, just name the person. Also, "church history" is rather vague, particularly since its referring to Baptism (I think, the article isn't really clear) and not Catholicism.--Carabinieri (talk) 21:51, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
I don't quite understand what you mean by baptism. But if we're going to have the word "perhaps", we don't need the "has been described as". Actually, a couple of other sources referred to in the article have made a similar claim. So,
StAnselm (talk) 22:05, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
  • "Church history" sounds like it's referring to the Catholic Church, but this program seems to be limited to Evangelicals. It's certainly not the most widely used evangelistic curriculum in the history of Christianity, considering the very long history of Catholic evangelism. Also I'm uncertain about the extensive use of primary sources in the article. It seems to me like every source in the article except for the article in the Sun Sentinel is written by Evangelicals from an Evangelical point of view. They don't seem to qualify as secondary sources.--Carabinieri (talk) 22:11, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Yes, of course they are secondary sources - there is only one primary source in the article, the "History" page on the EE website. Now, I interpret the claim as referring to the whole history of Christianity - but the key word is curriculum. I'm not aware of any Catholic evangelistic curriculum that's ever been widely used. StAnselm (talk) 23:22, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
  • The ALT2 hook needs assessment. StAnselm (talk) 00:52, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
  • ALT3 suggest ... that Evangelism Explosion has been described as "probably the most used and copied soul-winning training course ever embraced by Southern Baptists"? which is more plausible. Oppose ANY claim re "History of Christianity" piped to "church history", which the sources can't claim to be expert in. Or there are other facts - 70 languuages, 20,000 churches that could make a good hook. Johnbod (talk) 22:48, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
  • OK, what about ALT4: ... that the evangelistic training program Evangelism Explosion is used by over 20,000 churches worldwide? StAnselm (talk) 09:52, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
  • That's refed & fine by me, & ok to go, relying on Epeefleche's 1st review for the rest. Johnbod (talk) 14:12, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Note: struck hooks that were not approved to avoid confusion. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:57, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Evangelism_Explosion&oldid=864738398"