Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a22e465daca83401

Jump to content

Talk:Secular saint

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 18 years ago by Majoreditor in topic AfD Discussion

Removed section

[edit]

previously moved from Patron Saint:

Patron saints in the arts

[edit]

Consider Princess Diana

[edit]

Perhaps the late Princess Diana should be added to the list, since no marital infidelity was reported during her marriage to Prince Charles. -Wikid77 16:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

When you use the word "perhaps," does that mean you intend your remark as a joke? If not, why not? 67.166.31.135 18:08, 7 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Remove MLK, Jr.

[edit]

Perhaps remove "Martin Luther King, Jr." from the list after reports of bedroom antics recorded in secret audio tapes made at the direction of FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover (search the Internet). -Wikid77 16:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

List of "Secular Saints" doesn't cite sources, looks like Original Research

[edit]

My vote is to eliminate this section unless someone can provide references. At present it smacks of WP:OR. Majoreditor 03:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

On second thought, I am going to be bold and eliminate the section. I am also downgrading the article to stub since there's not much left after removing the original research. Majoreditor 03:59, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Please follow WP policies and provide specific citations. If you're going to list specific secular saints you need to provide a specific page cite from a reliable source. These could include a newspaper, magazine or website. Thanks, Majoreditor 03:11, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Dubious?

[edit]

I've tagged the following as dubious:

References and further reading

[edit]


Deletion?

[edit]

Should this article be deleted? It needs some dedicated work to bring it up to par. If it can't be salvaged then perhaps we should consider deletion. Thoughts, anyone? Majoreditor 01:56, 19 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

WikiProject class rating

[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 04:26, 10 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

AfD Discussion

[edit]

The final results from the AFD discussion were: Keep, 3 votes; Weak Keep, 4 votes; Weak Delete, 1 vote; Delete, nominator only.

Some of the comments suggested cleaning up the article to remove unsourced statements. I will do so shortly. Majoreditor (talk) 02:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)Reply