Talk:Apostle

Muhammad as God's Apostle in Islam

Muslims often call Muhammad the "Apostle of God." Should this be added along with the other uses of "apostle"? --Kitabparast 17:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I have edited this entry (which I definitely agree should be on this page) to try to make it more clear. I have changed the link to "Rasul" because that is the actual word which is often translated "apostle" and that article explains its application to Muhammmed. SlackerMom 13:18, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

…1:27 A.M. E.S.T. 8-4-2008

I know this may seem to be a challenge, though while reveiwing Twelve Apostles i noticed that Judaism had an office known as apostles which derives from the Hebrew word for a pharisaical College "freinds" The Friburg Greek Lexicon gives a broad definition as one who is sent on a mission, a commissioned representative of a congregation, a messenger for God, a person who has the special task of founding and establishing churches.

May there be something of a date to figure on an established time period of when the terming has exsistance. Also I am noteing that a church is of a reason perhaps as well as a college, the format for now is undiscribable though i think we get the picture, it's been enjoying keep up the good work. an Example of a Church in a small theory, perhaps when establishing a sort of understanding to another. May I ,ay i bring you my church as so then you may understand me. Explaining the past is a task that is of a knowledge that explaining something must derive from an exsisting format, thus in a begining of understanding a beleife in the same must be forfilled. It seems the only thing to do is learn and invent, in the course of true devine invention then may one forsee the future. Perhaps a sort of devine calculation effort, and that then as an tional it continues. In how through God God is protected, perhaps also a representing of Apostle.

1:41 A.M.David George DeLancey (talk) 05:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

yesterday i went to the mall —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.66.0.68 (talk) 20:02, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Apostle (Christian) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. PatGallacher (talk) 12:31, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Apostle (Christian) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 12:44, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Move 29 January 2022

Apostle (word) → Apostle – Prior move from "Apostle" to "Apostle (word)" was totally undiscussed. Due to the fact that it creates 1282 links to disambiguation pages through templates alone, this was a highly controversial move. I request reinstating the original title, something I can not do. The Banner talk 06:42, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. I made the page move and worked a lot to remove incoming links. Apostle linking to a DAB is necessary, as the term is used to refer to a wide range of things. Currently, a good part of the hyperlinks incoming are made to refer to Apostles in the New Testament, but the article Apostle (now Apostle (word)) is about the wide concept of apostle and not the Apostles in the New Testament in particular. Veverve (talk) 06:51, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

@Bkonrad: I see you have reverted my page move, but the talk page is still there. Veverve (talk) 06:56, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 29 January 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: withdrawn Veverve (talk) 17:22, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

---

Apostle → Apostle (word) – There is some confusion, because a good part of the incoming links are used to refer to Apostles in the New Testament and the article Apostle is about the wide concept of apostle and not the Apostles in the New Testament in particular, i.e. a good part of incoming links are misleading which make them worse for the readers than them leading to a DAB page where they could directly see what they are looking for. We cannot let the misleading links accumulate, whatever the necessary work needed may be. For the sake of maintainability and to allow users who use tools to disambiguate to use them to sort the confusion out, I propose this page move and that Apostle be redirected to Apostle (disambiguation).
Apostle linking to a DAB is also necessary, because the term is used to refer to a wide range of things without a clear primary topic. Veverve (talk) 07:07, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. Just because there are incoming links that are wrong doesn't mean an article should be moved, it means that the incoming links should be fixed. The hatnote at the top of this article links directly to the Apostles in the New Testament article as well as the DAB page. Rreagan007 (talk) 08:49, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
• The current article appears to serve as a broad-concept article with Apostles in the New Testament being linked in text and a narrower topic. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:04, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

@Crouch, Swale: yes. If you look at what links to this article, a significant number of incoming links are meant to designate Apostles in the New Testament, and not the general concept of someone being sent by another person. Veverve (talk) 10:20, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

The links should probably be fixed by the bluelink project rather than having every link that "must" be fixed where it may not be clear which is meant and thus may be disambiguated incorrectly. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:24, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

The links should probably be fixed by someone with a clue about apostles. WP:BPAT has the tools to clean up mess resulting from hasty moves, though it's not an easy or rewarding task, but no specialised subject knowledge. Certes (talk) 23:14, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

@Certes: as I wrote below, I have fixed all incoming links. As you noted, if this RM is not made, this will create a legacy of clean-up whenever a careless editor writes Jesus met the apostles without checking the link. Veverve (talk) 05:33, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose The suggested page move is an overreaction on the few links that are incorrect. Fix those links, do not break Wikipedia instead. The Banner talk 11:10, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

@The Banner: well, I have had a hard time finding links which link here and are correct. Could you provide some? Furthermore, one only needs to check the pages which link here to find that there are numerous erroneous incoming links. Veverve (talk) 11:26, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Far less then the 1282 you want to create with the move (and that is templates alone). The Banner talk 11:32, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

According to this page even 2066 links. Were there really so many faulty links before your controversial moves? The Banner talk 13:23, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

@The Banner: I am still waiting for links directing to this article where the context refers to the broad concept of apostle and not the Apostles in the NT. The first 20 or so links in the "What links here" section are faulty; I have done my research, now the burden of proof is on you. Veverve (talk) 13:32, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

So to solve 20 links, you are willing to create 2046 incorrect links with widespread disruption? The Banner talk 13:39, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

@The Banner: I have already corrected dozens of link, and I am not going to check all thousands of links coming from here; but, after checking those dozens of links and the first 20 "What links here" for this article, I can safely guess a big quantity if not most links targetting this article are meant for Apostles in the New Testament. Veverve (talk) 14:55, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

And now you start editwarring on Apostles to make your point? The Banner talk 15:28, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose for now. As a broad concept introduction, there is nothing particularly wrong about landing here as primary topic. There is nothing preventing the OP or anyone else from fixing links they think are incorrect. Once the incorrect links are sorted out, then it might be worth reconsidering. Also, the move should be proposed as a multi-move since having Apostle to redirect to Apostle (disambiguation) would result in a WP:MALPLACED disambiguation page. So far as this move directly impacts the disambiguation page, notification should be placed there as well. older ≠ wiser 14:11, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
• No opinion on the move proposal, but just to note that I've amended Template:Catholic Church footer and Template:Coptic saints, which between them accounted for about a thousand of those incoming links. Dan from A.P. (talk) 14:41, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

@DanFromAnotherPlace: good call! I have now also fixed the other templates using erroneous hyperlink to here. Veverve (talk) 15:05, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

• Comment @Rreagan007, Bkonrad, Crouch, Swale, DanFromAnotherPlace, and The Banner: I have now fixed all incoming links. I still believe the page should be moved for the sake of long-term maintability, as there is a clear tendency to hyperlink to this page to a precise title in a specific religion such as Manichaeism, LDS or Islam - which are in the DAB page -, and not to refer to "apostle" as a general term. The 'general meaning of the word apostle ' also seems not to be the primary topic. I think in order for WP users not to erroneously link to this article thinking the article is about precise titles in specific religions in the future, this RM should be approved. Veverve (talk) 10:29, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. It's good as it is, and those meaning the Christian apostles are elucidated thoroughly in the hatnote and the lead. Also, the suggested title seems wrong, as the article is not only about the word but the concept. Perhaps make more redirects to Apostles in the New Testament, which will show as options when a new link is created, thinking of Apostle of Jesus. (I thought of more, but they were already there.) Veverve, thank you for fixing wrong links, and please keep doing it. Different request, once we talk: please close new-line html (br /, not br), or our editor misguides in colours. I fixed one for you above. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:48, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
• Comment: I was wrong thinking that Apostle (Christian) was a redirect to Apostles in the New Testament. Perhaps we should make it that way. I guess many links would go right then, and only the few meaning other Christian apostles would have to be fixed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:57, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Gerda Arendt: you are not, it temporarily leads to the DAB so that I can use the de-DAB tool to fix all incoming links. Veverve (talk) 11:00, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

  I see. That's clever (but makes your edit summaries even more misleading, speaking of "disambiguation"). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:05, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

  Please, when replying to a bullet, repeat the bullet. (When replying to whatever, repeat that whatever, explained on top at User talk:Drmies). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:07, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

• Comment Since doubts have been expressed above about the scope of the problem, I want to note for future reference that Veverve has now fixed over a thousand individual links, the vast majority of which were intended for Apostles in the New Testament (take a look at Veverve's contributions). There now remain only 124 mainspace incoming links to this article. That's a clear sign that most editors expect Apostle to be an article about New Testament apostles specifically (so incorrect links will keep accumulating). I'm still undecided on the move proposal myself, just want !voters to be aware of the facts. Dan from A.P. (talk) 12:50, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

• I had made some fixes already today for Apostle from 04:48 29 January 2022, to 06:24 29 January 2022. Thereafter, with the tool, the work was done, still today, for Apostle and Apostles between 07:02 30 January 2022 and 10:01 30 January 2022.

This was followed by fixes of the incoming links to Apostle (Christian) as many uses of this hyperlink were intended for this page (apostle in general); those fixes took place from 10:38 30 January 2022 to 11:36 30 January 2022.

Lastly, I fixed incoming links to Apostles in Christianity; those fixes took place from 12:48 30 January 2022, to 12:55 30 January 2022. I had before that started fixing the incoming links to Apostles in Christianity from 03:41 29 January 2022 to 04:34 29 January 2022. Veverve (talk) 16:40, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

I had already sporadically made some fixes to those four redirects before today.

All this to say that I strongly believe this RM should be made, and have seem how misused this Apostle title is: "Apostle" and "Apostles" need to link to the DAB page for the sake of long-term maintability. Veverve (talk) 16:40, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

• The request is incomplete. "Apostle" cannot redirect to "Apostle (disambiguation)". I'm not convinced there is no PT. If Apostles in the New Testament is the PT (as I suspect it is), then this move can go ahead but that article should be moved to the main name. Srnec (talk) 17:31, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

• I withraw my RM following DanFromAnotherPlace's advice. The situation has become too complicated, and the opposition is currently unanimous. Veverve (talk) 17:22, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Image

@Bkonrad: I had put an ambassador, because the lede says the word apostle is "an emissary, from Greek ἀπόστολος (apóstolos), literally 'one who is sent off', from the verb ἀποστέλλειν (apostéllein), 'to send off'. The purpose of such sending off is usually to convey a message, and thus 'messenger' is a common alternative translation; other common translations include 'ambassador' and 'envoy'." Veverve (talk) 16:06, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

That may be one literal translation of the Greek term, however it not commonly used in English as such. The image you added only confounds and confuses the common use of the term. older ≠ wiser 16:09, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

@Bkonrad: what do you mean by common use of the term? Veverve (talk) 16:47, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Ask just about anyone (other than perhaps yourself) and the term apostle means the apostles of the New Testament or a closely derivative sense as in a modern-day apostle in the same tradition. older ≠ wiser 16:53, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

@Bkonrad: You are arguing about Apostle being the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for Apostles in the New Testament, which is a totally different issue (see also WP:NWFCTM). The Apostles in the New Testament are not the subject of the article. The subject of the article is the word "apostle" and its numerous meanings (which include but is not limited to the Apostles in the New Testament, the same way Biblical canon is part of Canon (basic principle)); we must either find a good illustration for the article or not put any image. Veverve (talk) 17:01, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps it should be, but this article about the term should not mislead as to what the most common usage is. The image you had selected was entirely irrelevant. older ≠ wiser 17:03, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

You certainly know your shortcuts, Ververe. But when you look at Apostle, it states: The word in this sense may be used metaphorically in various contexts, but is mostly found either used specifically for early associates of the founder of a religion who were important in spreading the founder's teachings, or to refer to someone who spread a doctrine or teaching. Many diplomats, messengers and envoys will be baffled when named an apostle. The Banner talk 17:22, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes, if it could be shown that "apostle" (in Greek no doubt) was actually a plausible term for a diplomatic envoy at some point, then an image from the appropriate period of such a person, with an appropriate explanatory caption, might be acceptable. The splendidly-dressed Russian certainly wasn't, and was bound to puzzle and confuse readers. Johnbod (talk) 02:46, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

@Johnbod: it can be proved as it is what the ref for the lede says. You can have a look at it here where there are also other Greek dictionaries giving the same information. The extracts are:

• "So the envoy went to Miletus" ([1]). Original Greek: "ὃ μὲν δὴ ἀπόστολος ἐς τὴν Μίλητον ἦν" ([2])
• "and next he went on an embassy in a trireme to Lacedaemon". Original Greek: "δεύτερα αὐτὸς ἐς Λακεδαίμονα τριήρεϊ ἀπόστολος ἐγίνετο·"([3]])
• "and they, making some pretext of an embassy to the city, sent a ship of thirty oars" ([4]). I cannot find the original Greek, but the LSJ confirms.

Therefore, maybe you would agree to put the image of Echedemos who was the head of an embassy, or of Aeschines.
Also, Johnbod, you changed more than the image in your latest edit by removing other changes I made which I feel were not controversial. Why? Veverve (talk) 03:20, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

I wasn't aware I had, & you can put them back. I'd be ok with Aeschines, with a caption explaining why he is there, probably as 2nd image. What do others think? Johnbod (talk) 03:33, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Well, it seems no one is objecting, so I will change the image to that of Aeschines with an explanation in a few hours. Veverve (talk) 07:09, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Why do you think that an apostle is an envoy? Because that is a mind-junp I can not follow. About the picture, the same as Johnbod. The Banner talk 10:28, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

@The Banner: the LSJ and other Greek dictionaries says "ἀπόστολος" was first used to designate an envoy or embassador. This also what the lede of the article says. Veverve (talk) 10:40, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

But what about the common use? Could it be a good idea to split off that historical info into a new article with a name like Apostle (Greek) (historical will still be confusing)? The Banner talk 10:54, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

@The Banner: the common use of the word "apostle" seems (though I am not sure) to be Apostles in the New Testament, but the article is about the broad meaning of "apostle" as messenger (other meanings such as "military fleet" are not mentioned and I feel should not).

There is not much to split on the use of the word in the sense of "envoy" or "embassador", and this split would fall into a WP:DICTIONARY entry.

Since the article is about the broad meaning of apostle as an envoy, I think an Ancient figure can be a common, neutral ground for an illustration of the topic. Using the Twelve Apostles with cross imagery to represent the word "apostle" in a broad meaning that encompasses in Islam is quite problematic due to mainstream Islam's vision of the crucifiction, same goes for Paul the Apostle. Using other religiously biased images for the summary would have the same problem and probably others (such as an image of Mani being probably undue since his religion did not spread much). Veverve (talk) 11:18, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

So, your are asking for more pictures to make it more neutral?The Banner talk 11:36, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

@The Banner: No. There is only enough place for one image in the summary; trying to put in the summary every illustration of what an apostle is which is mentioned in the article would take too much space. I think adding an illustration that displays in a neutral manner this broad (and therefore with multiple dimensions) topic is one of the ways to quickly show neutrally what the article is about. Veverve (talk) 11:55, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

There exists something called a collage, multiple pictures combined in one picture. The Banner talk 12:36, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 20 January 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: consensus against proposed title. Other titles have been suggested, but none have clear support. No prejudice against a new move-discussion based on a new proposed title. Thank you all for keeping the discussion civil. —usernamekiran (talk) 03:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

---

Apostle → Apostle (word) – In February 2022, the number of incoming links was 298. Now, it is 322 (archive). Most of those links are incorrect.

As another user (Certes) has noted in the previous RM, the current position of this article constantly generates new faulty links, a legacy of clean-up whenever a careless editor writes Jesus met the apostles without checking the link. I myself have fixed about a thousand (maybe even more) of faulty incoming links last year. As another user had noted (Dan from A.P.) in the same previous RM discussion, right after I had finished (30 January 2022), there were 124 incoming links to this article. So, in less than a year the number of faulty incoming links has drastically increased.

For the sake of maintainability and to allow users who use tools to disambiguate to use them to sort the confusion out, I propose this page move (Apostle → Apostle (word)), and that Apostle and Apostles (per WP:PLURAL) should be redirected to Apostle (disambiguation). Veverve (talk) 10:12, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose The suggested page move is an overreaction on the few links that are incorrect. Fix those links, do not break Wikipedia instead. The Banner talk 10:19, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

  break[ing] Wikipedia is a very strange way to describe a RM, especially one aimed at being a long-term solution to reduce the number of faulty links to a page... Veverve (talk) 10:30, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

• See User talk:Veverve/Archive 3#Undiscussed controversial page move. To be positive: at least you make discussion possible. The Banner talk 11:23, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

  I have no idea what you are trying to convey by refering to this previous discussion. Veverve (talk) 11:43, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

A polite reminder to the community that you have tried this before but without success. Including a move without consensus or discussion.The Banner talk 19:47, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay. Veverve (talk) 05:13, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

• Support, I think it's clear that there is no PRIMARYTOPIC, the 12 Biblical apostles get much more page views and have the same if not more long-term significance.--Ortizesp (talk) 19:17, 20 January 2023 (UTC)19:17, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
• Support, and redirect to Apostles in the New Testament as per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. Rreagan007 (talk) 20:11, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
• EDIT OPPOSE Support - I'm pretty sure the twelve apostles are a topic with far more educational significance than the word. Red Slash 20:46, 20 January 2023 (UTC) I think that the current DABCONCEPT article is fine Red Slash 21:55, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
• Comment: I have proposed that, if this RM goes through, Apostle and Apostles be redirected to Apostle (disambiguation). I proposed this in order to fix the fact that Apostle and Apostles were used wrongly (and that, as another user pointed out, there does not seem to be a primary topic). Retargeting to a non-DAB page would still maintain this problem of incoming faulty links; it would once again create a legacy of clean-up whenever a careless editor writes Oliver Cowdery met the apostles (see Apostle (Latter Day Saints)) without checking the link. Also, there is a least 124 incoming links which are correctly about the word 'apostle' and not the Apostles of the New Testament. Veverve (talk) 04:15, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose this rename. "Word" as a disambiguator does not make any sense. This is a broad concept article. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:11, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per Marcocapelle. The article is about what an apostle is, not about the word apostle. Dicklyon (talk) 05:09, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose as proposed. But I do think that Apostle should redirect to Apostles in the New Testament as the very clear primary topic. What to rename this article though? Apostle (religious term), maybe? -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:56, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

• What about Apostle (emissary)? Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 18:32, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

• The article has only a line or two that are really on this. Isn't Apostle (religion) enough? Johnbod (talk) 19:13, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose per Marcocapelle. This article is fine as is. And I don't see a problem with linking to this page, when people are looking for the Apostles of Jesus. May be a slight surprise, but it is a related term and a general page about apostles. Natg 19 (talk) 02:05, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.