This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Cross necklace is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gemology and Jewelry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Gemology and JewelryWikipedia:WikiProject Gemology and JewelryTemplate:WikiProject Gemology and JewelryGemology and Jewelry articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles
I've re-written the portion about the Ethiopian matäb. The cited source is very specific that the matäb is a silk cord, not a cross necklace. Someone might affix a cross to the matäb but this is not required. I'm quite confused as to why this was written the way it was, because the source is very clear about it. (The same source was also given as two separate citations; I've consolidated them into one.) Hence the Napier expedition isn't really relevant – in fact, I'm not sure the matäb text is still relevant for this article, but I've re-written it to reflect what the source actually says about it. (What the source doesn't say, and I offer this purely FYI, is that the matäb is considered mandatory only among adherents living in rural areas, although that's mostly where people in Ethiopia live.) -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:23, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Having said all that, what might be relevant for this article is a description of the various styles of crosses that Ethiopians and Eritreans do wear (e.g. Axum cross, Lalibela cross etc.). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 13:56, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In the meantime I did add a bit about what the church itself says regarding cross necklaces. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:51, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm concerned the lede takes too much liberty with the term 'cross necklace'. Neither of the two current citations support the claim that the term 'Cross necklace' exclusively refers to a necklace with a Christian cross or crucifix - and it is certainly a fact that not all not all necklaces with crosses are of a Christian or cruciform nature. I think the wording needs tweaking to include, something like, 'commonly used to describe..........'. Obscurasky (talk) 20:39, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
ok, I've edited the lede. Feel free to comment on the changes. Obscurasky (talk) 23:12, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a speedy deletion tag because it seems that no citation can be found to support the claim that Cross necklace is even a bona fide term. Obscurasky (talk) 16:32, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've reinstated the tag, after it was removed. The tag has not been placed there for no reason and should not be removed unless a reliable/credible reference is found. Obscurasky (talk) 18:42, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
not so. Anyone but the originator of the article may remove a speedy tag. As the reviewing administrator I removed the tag because speedy deletion is strictly and narrowly limited to those instances enumerated at WP:CSD, and whether an article might not be on a recognized term is not among them. Anyone who might want the article deleted, should use WP:AFD. I cannot judge whether or not the community will decide the article should be deleted, and it is not up to me.
I see you replaced the tag I removed, and this is not permitted. See WP:CSD and WP:Deletion policy. I do not think any administrator would delete the article on the basis of the criterion you used. DGG ( talk ) 18:57, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You must stop reverting this tag. Find a reliable reference and then remove it.Obscurasky (talk) 19:00, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fir the third and last time there is no such rule. Just use AfD and get a community opinion. DGG ( talk ) 19:06, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You may know more wiki rules than I do, but I'm pretty sure there's also a rule that says editors can't 'make up' a term or expression and then write a page about it. If that has been the case here (as would seem to be indicated by the lack of supporting citations) then the page should be removed. As the 'reviewing administrator', are you happy to investigate the legitimacy of this page?Obscurasky (talk) 19:14, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Editors can and do make up terms and then write articles about them. The articles only stay in the encyclopedia if there are reliable sources that discuss the term. You are trying to get it deleted via the WP:CSD process. That process is very limited in scope and you as an editor can not make up criteria to get an article deleted. You can nominate it for deletion using the WP:AFD process and it will be discussed and an administrator will determine if there is consensus to delete the article. GBfan 19:41, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. To be honest, my goal isn't really to get the article deleated; I'd much prefer it if someone could simply demonstrate that 'Cross neclace is a legitimate term and that it really does refer to what this article says it does. However, in the event that this can not be demonstrated, then it certainly should be considered for deletion. In any case, I've asked User talk:DGG to investigate the matter, above, but if he/she wont, I will pursue it via WP:AFD. Thanks again, Obscurasky (talk) 21:01, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article should be expanded and it is interesting. I think before tagging any tags, that must be discussed here to reach WP:consensus.Justice007 (talk) 23:25, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
