Talk:Churches of Christ
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Churches of Christ article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | Churches of Christ was one of the Philosophy and religion good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
| Current status: Delisted good article | |||||||||||||
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
GA reassessment
Churches of Christ
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: Delist for lack of summary style, outdatedness and prose problems. Note that the lack of images in certain sections is not a GA criterion. Femke (talk) 16:25, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Churches of Christ may warrant re-assessment for a number of reasons, including number of issues with page structure and layout. This includes: the length of the lead; the volume of imagery (none until section four, and none in the sixth section either); sections starting with pull quotes before the subject is introduced in prose; a degree of overcite, other citation needed, and a number of overly short subsections (also in section six); also some badly out-of-date statistics (at least one 2014 source in the infobox); and a general lack of conciseness - at 135,000kb, the page could merit splitting. Iskandar323 (talk) 14:55, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
- I've hacked the lead down a bit, but yes, the entire thing is bloated and would benefit from trimming. I do not think a split is needed--nor do I immediately see an obvious place to do one. It's not something I've paid attention to in a while, and yes, GA could reasonably be pulled from it as it stands now. Jclemens (talk) 02:22, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
RENEW.org
Should there not be a mention of Renew.org in this article as it is an important resources and teaching group with their online university. Partnering with both Churches of Christs and Christian Churches https://renew.org/about/#partnering-organizations JamieBrown2011 (talk) 10:25, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
- Renew.org is a primary source (direct from the subject), while Wikipedia content should be based on secondary or tertiary sources. Also, the movement seems to purposely omit church names from its website, not identifying the names or groups of "like-minded" churches that are part of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adavidb (talk • contribs) 13:26, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
Errors
Wow. The main page has so many glaring errors. For example, the churches of Christ are just the churches of Christ and the non-institutional churches of Christ are loosely fellowshipped by both groups. The non-institutional group see the groups as separate, while the main group of churches of Christ don't make that distinction. Most all the churches of Christ in both groups are non-instrumental. You've lumped them both together. That's not right. The whole page needs a rewrite. ~2026-64675-0 (talk) 03:30, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
- Reliable sources for verification? —ADavidB 05:35, 30 January 2026 (UTC)