![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Kandisa page were merged into Trisagion on 21 June 2020. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
I've substantially rewritten this article today: taking the small entry that was present as a start, expanded it to include more on history, and new sections on liturgical usage, etc. — Antonios Aigyptos talk 09:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
This is an encyclopedia article, not a liturgical translation site. The trisagion has been translated into literally hundreds of languages. Should we include them all? This is trivia, as defined by the Wikipedia Manual of Style: "A trivia section is one that contains a disorganized and "unselective" list." The list is clearly unorganized (or else has an entirely implicit and inscrutable organization) and entirely unselective (that is, why is Finnish included, but Korean not? Or Spanish for that matter? The Trisagion is certainly spoken more in Spanish than in Finnish) At the very least, the list should be reviewed for relevance, and some rationale for the selection and explanation of the list given. - ElijahBenedict ( talk) 21:08, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree that this list is inappropriate for an encyclopedia article. It should be merged into oldwikisource:Trisagion. Daask ( talk) 21:52, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
A Latin geek has provided an unsightly 'alternate' translation of Agios in the vocative. While, yes, that is (on some readings of the Greek and all readings of the English) more grammatically accurate for Classical Latin, as far as I've seen it's not the actual Latin: it is and should be simply rendered in the ecclesiastical nominative. See, eg, this discussion.
Googling produces this page and pages copying it, meaning we're producing WP:original.
I'll remove it. If someone finds independent sources employing the vocative, don't include them within the standard translation, but in a wp:foot to the text with your ref. - LlywelynII ( talk) 03:21, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Also noticed sometimes but not always the Latin is appended ...et totius mundi ("...and all the world"), but not sure about the addition's origin or prevalence. - LlywelynII ( talk) 03:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Maybe the views of the non-chalcedonians should be added to this article. In particular these forums [1] [2] [3] [4] claim:
I know forums are not always reliable sources, but I'm hoping someone would revise the article and make it less POV by finding the suggested references in the threads. (please reply!) The Cake 2 ( talk) 05:30, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
'qandisha' is a typographical error for 'qadisha' ( Pamour ( talk) 13:57, 28 April 2019 (UTC)).
"Some believe it is extremely ancient, perhaps of apostolic-era origin". This sentece should be erased since during the Apostolic era the Trinity doctrine wasn't in use. Matthew, 28:19 (All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit) biblical scholars dispute the authenticity of this sentence which was probably edited in later times.(Peter C. Phan, The Cambridge Companion to the Trinity (Cambridge Companions to Religion), Cambridge University Press, 2011, page :3). The practice of the trinity only started in the 3rd. century C.E. and the first text which mentions it is by Tertullian (155-200) who didn't believe in the trinity himself, wrote : "treis hypostases, homoousioi". Sanctus31 ( talk) 18:39, 26 August 2023 (UTC)