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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Use of non-English sources. Per
Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English sources : "Citations to non-English reliable sources are allowed on the English Wikipedia. However, because this project is in English, English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when available and of equal quality and relevance. As with sources in English, if a dispute arises involving a citation to a non-English source, editors may request a quotation of relevant portions of the original source be provided, either in text, in a footnote, or on the article talk page.". There are no English-language sources in this article.
Laurel Lodged (
talk)
12:26, 5 April 2021 (UTC)reply
Yes, more warnings for vandalism are indeed available. And it states already in your quote that non-English sources are allowed. Do not invent new guidelines. The Bannertalk13:26, 5 April 2021 (UTC)reply
First, both of the sources currently cited have a “read in English” option, so they qualify as “English-language” sources. Second, while we do prefer English-language sources, we absolutely allow reliable sources written in other languages. There is no requirement that an article have even one source written in English. What we require are reliable sources, and reliable sources can be in any language.
That said... the two sources currently cited are somewhat weak. I am not sure they can be considered reliable (I would assess the “canon” source as being borderline... and the “nd” source as unreliable). Please search for better (an academic source would be ideal).
Blueboar (
talk)
15:46, 5 April 2021 (UTC)reply
On looking for sources about this topic, I suspect that these structures may be unique to the Netherlands... If so, that should be explained in the article.
Also, while I find very little scholarly sources if I search google scholar for “Barn Church”... I find quite a bit when I search for “Schuurkerk” (ie in Dutch). This may be a topic where it is best to NOT translate the article title into English, and to redirect it to the non-English term
Schuurkerk. It is likely that an English speaker searching for information about these structures will do so after coming across the Dutch term for them, and thus will search for it using the Dutch. We can include a parenthetical translation in the opening sentence so the curious know what the Dutch term means.
Blueboar (
talk)
17:33, 5 April 2021 (UTC)reply
No, as I have used several (3) books about churches that mention the term "Barn Church" as a description of a specific type of church building. Unfortunately, it is hard to get books out of the library right now. The Bannertalk17:38, 5 April 2021 (UTC)reply
Good to know. This struck me as an interesting (if obscure) topic. I look forward to seeing the article improve, and learning more about these structures as it develops. Thank you for your work.
Blueboar (
talk)
19:42, 5 April 2021 (UTC)reply