Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Talk:Adam and Steve

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

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2007-01-31 Automated pywikipediabot message

[edit]

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 20:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed "concern" and "transwiki" templates

[edit]

I believe that this has the potential to become more substantial than a dictionary definition, because of the cultural references in various titles. Also, (aside from the usual Wikipedia rules), at least this image can be used (from this context]), and I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to find another one outside the Internet. If anyone (besides a robot) would like to object (and, given the article's current shortness, I can certainly see why), go right ahead. —Lenoxus 05:43, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What other information can we put on here>

[edit]

I just searched Google for about an hour and found NOTHING relevant that should go in this article. I am at a loss. I don't know how to expand this article. Chexmix53 (talk) 19:53, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

William Dannemeyer

[edit]

William Dannemeyer phrased it as "God's plan for man in this world is Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve."[1] -- AnonMoos (talk) 16:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

[edit]

Twelve years ago Lenoxus wrote above that this article might expand via cultural references. But it hasn't, and it won't. I don't doubt that innumerable passing cultural references could be found, but that would be in the nature of a collection of trivia, which fails WP:SIGCOV: "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention". This article will never be more than a stub, and in any case, doesn't have enough notability to survive as a standalone article. It was properly transwikied to Wiktionary. The Wikipedia article should be deleted, or perhaps merged, if an appropriate target article can be found; perhaps as part of Christian right#Sex and sexuality, or Christianity and homosexuality. Mathglot (talk) 23:00, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think this qualifies as significant coverage. StAnselm (talk) 00:46, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]