Talk:Nativity of Mary

POV

Is a section on the birth of Mary in Islamic Scripture relevant to an article about a Christian feast day celebrating the birth of Mary? It seems to me that a section about an Islamic celebration of the birth of Mary would be relevant, but not a general outlining of Mary's birth in Islamic sources. Hamilcar4532 (talk) 15:09, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

POV

A lot of the text sounds like it came out of devotional literature rather than a more neutral history. PurpleChez (talk) 15:01, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Birth of Mary

September 8 is considered the birthday of Mary (at least by the Roman Catholic church). Should her birth be listed under "Births" in the September 8 article? Is there any reason why it is not listed there? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 13:46, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Nativity of Mary. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724140035/http://www.catecheticsonline.com/SourcesofDogma9.php to http://www.catecheticsonline.com/SourcesofDogma9.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120909040357/http://campus.udayton.edu:80/mary/meditations/birthday.html to http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/meditations/birthday.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120909040357/http://campus.udayton.edu:80/mary/meditations/birthday.html to http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/meditations/birthday.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:21, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Deleting challenged claims

Can I remind editors here, that challenged claims can be deleted at *any time*, without any further research. Thank you. Wjhonson (talk) 22:14, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

They can be, but should they be? Not if they are very easily referenced. Johnbod (talk) 03:53, 3 November 2025 (UTC)