Jump to content

Talk:Blue Letter Bible

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wrote the intial contribution to this article, and am trying to figure out if it can be de-prodded and salvaged. I welcome any thoughts or advice! Thanks.--Frank Rabinovitch 18:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[moved these notes to the notability section below] --Frank Rabinovitch 07:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


edits for later today under consideration

[edit]

I will be adding links, documentation, info about the BLB Institute, the BLB CD, and the parent Ministry Sowing Circle later today. Cleaning up the bad format, and shortening the listing (I think).

A link I'm considering adding: http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2004/330/754/2004-330754078-01e86fe5-F.pdf for Sowing Circle financials --Frank Rabinovitch 19:40, 21 November 2006 (UTC) This has been added today. --Frank Rabinovitch 05:45, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

prod sticker removal

[edit]

I have removed the prod entitled "Fails WP:WEB". --Frank Rabinovitch 07:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons for removing the WP:WEB prod (as copied from WEB article):

  • The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself.
  • The content is distributed via a site which is both well known and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster

Support of the above reasoning will be provided (here and in the article) late Tuesday 11/21/06 so as to allow the Wikipedia administrators to adhere to their review schedule as described to me by the helpful administrator Dlohcierekim.

Frank --Frank Rabinovitch 02:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Additional reasoning

--Frank Rabinovitch 06:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Other Factors A few thoughts on the BLB - trying to justify notability

  • According to a fellow named Tom Harrison and his Wikipedia user page here, the Blue Letter Bible is linked to from Wikipedia about 183 times, ranking it number 1581 on his list of about 5550 sites having at least 50 links. I believe his user page was last modified on Sept 7, 2006. He disclaims full accuracy for his list... Based on the listing, the BLB is the 2nd most 'linked to' Bible on the internet, from Wikipedia. I'm not sure this should carry any weight in the discussion, but I thought I'd mention it. Example
  • An article on the Blue Letter Bible and Sowing Circle is 'about to be published' in Calvary Chapel Magazine. It is at the proofreading stage. [If a copy is required for Admin during the WP:WEB review, please let me know.]

--Frank Rabinovitch 07:13, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BLB question on Top headline, and on Capitals - Please add input

[edit]

This is a question I posed to User talk:Akradecki, an editor on this article

Thanks for your edits on Blue letter bible. My sign stood out like a sore thumb, even to a novice like me, but I didn't have the courage to remove it - thought I had to sign it! Could I ask advice on two questions please:

  • seems like there is a needless Level 2 headline at the top of the BLB article (the one that reads 'The Blue Letter Bible'). It forces the contents box up higher than what I've seen on other articles. Should I get rid of it? Or if you agree, feel free of course.... Being a novice, I'm not very bold yet..
  • When I link to the article, the link only works as 'Blue letter bible', not 'Blue Letter Bible'. Is some kind of alias or referral necessary, or what should I do? Should I rename the article with capitals?

Thanks again, Frank. --Frank Rabinovitch 00:19, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

One of the reviews of BLB documented in the article is only available on the internet as an MP3 file, and it is behind a shopping cart with a price of $2.99. I'm wondering if this violates any Wikipedia rules, and it also seems a little cheesy to me, (and I added the link!). Should I provide a transcription of the interview? Its about 250 words. I'd have to solicit permission... Any advice from the Wiki With It out there?--Frank Rabinovitch 11:18, 23 November 2006 (UTC) (signature added later)[reply]

[edit]

I believe that I have run afoul of Wikipedia:External links during a previous edit. This guideline states, in part:

For policy or technical reasons, editors are restricted from linking to the following:
1. A website that you own, maintain or are acting as an agent for; even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked to. This is in line with the conflict of interests guidelines. If it is a relevant and informative link that should otherwise be included, mention it on the talk page and let neutral and independent Wikipedia editors decide whether to add it.

As previously disclosed on my user page (my user name is 'Frank at blb'), and to the Admin who welcomed me to my first venture in editing (this article), I am a developer of the Blue Letter Bible. As such, the guidelines states that I should not create links to those sites, and so I am deleting them now. Below, is what I have deleted, placed below for the purpose of discussion.

--- Begin container preserving the External Links

--- End container preserving the External Links

If any neutral and independent editor comes along, please consider adding them back, as I believe they are helpful to the quality of the article. --Frank Rabinovitch 09:37, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With a little more thought, and less panic, I guess this one is OK:

so I'm putting it back in. I have no relation with guidestar.org.

Update: The external links for which I am conflicted have been placed back on by an independent editor. The external link for which I am not conflicted (financial statement) has been removed in similar fashion. --Frank Rabinovitch 05:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Concern about linking to a blog

[edit]

Concerning linking guidelines at Wikipedia:External links, where it states (in part):

Links normally to be avoided
9. Links to blogs, except those written by a recognized authority.

The link in question in the BLB article is under the review section:

--- Begin container preserving the link to blog

--- End container preserving the link to blog

My rationale for including the link to the blog is as follows:

  1. The website itself seems to be a well-known reviewer of software, with over 300 external links.
  2. The blog linked to is the only blog on the website, and has a single author. This is not a situation where there are multiple bloggers over whom the webmaster has little/no editorial control.
  3. The blog writer is the webmaster, Rubén Gómez
  4. Rubén Gómez is also the registered owner of bsreview.org (internic.net)
  5. The blog writer's blog is already linked to on Wikipedia, at New English Translation, Oct '05. This reasoning is unsure, as it might rub up against the description of Wikipedia policy "it tolerates things it does not condone" found in WP:POINT
  6. The author Rubén Gómez may be notable
    • Interview with CMUG (Christian Macintosh Users Group) here

Please provide input if you disagree, so that we might reach a consensus. --Frank Rabinovitch 06:13, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BLB Search Tools

[edit]

I added an example of BLB search tools in practice, from the list of 1,250+ websites using these tools. I removed the direct link to BLB search tools, as it becomes redundant. --Frank Rabinovitch 02:18, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Name

[edit]

Could somebody explain the significance of the name? Anything I write about the name would be sheer speculation. jonathon 23:00, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The name Blue Letter Bible was chosen in November 1995, by the original developers of the Blue Letter Bible website. I participated in that meeting. Back in 1995, many websites adopted the style of having hyperlinked text colored blue, which changed (if memory serves) to purple after the link had been clicked on.

Since our goal was to have every Bible verse, and every word in each verse, linked to commentaries, lexicons, concordances, etc, effectively the whole Bible on the website would be "blued", or linked to study tools.

Hence, the name Blue Letter Bible. We conciously recognized that this was both similar and at variance to the Red Letter Bible, so-named because the words spoken by the incarnate Jesus are highlighted in red letters. (http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Red_letter_Bible). What we were trying to communicate was "blue for internet", and "lots of hyperlinks".

Today, in 2010, there are over 30,000,000 hyperlinks within the website (the number has essentially grown linearly with the number of translations supported).

I can be reached most easily at frankr (a t) earthlink.net. Frank Rabinovitch 98.151.183.5 (talk) 08:27, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, would you please give me your knowledge on the law of God for keeping the commandment of the sabbath in the new testament. Thank you and May our God bless jean boothe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.108.121.67 (talk) 01:14, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is a difficult question. The only 3 data points I am aware of in Scripture are that 1- the believers in Acts gathered on the first day of the week, Sunday instead of the Sabbath, 2- the 4th commandment is the only one not repeated by Christ and the Apostles, and 3- Paul discusses our freedom to respect or not respect certain holy days. Even so, I feel that some recognition of the Sabbath is commendable, if not commanded. For more thorough discussion, I recommend John R. Rice's book, "Sunday or Sabbath." 24.56.73.226 (talk) 00:19, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Blue Letter Bible. 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:

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) 13:24, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Blue_Letter_Bible&oldid=1215767601"