Talk:Quiverfull

Latest comment: 8 months ago by Clovermoss in topic Recent edits

POV phrasing?

edit

At this time, 5/18/2021, the Quiverfull article opens with “ Quiverfull is a theological position held by some conservative Christian couples who belong to Christian denominations that see children as blessings from God.[1][2][3]”

Does this phrasing imply that other denominations don’t see children as blessings from God? Does it align with NPOV? It seems like a subtle dig at Christians who support birth control. I’d like a more neutral phrase like they “see large families as blessings from God.” Am I misinterpreting this opening sentence?

Seeker718 (talk) 05:22, 19 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Archived Discussion

edit

I have archived all pre-2021 discussions as the page was getting very long. You can find it here: Talk:Quiverfull/Archive 1. Nauseous Man (talk) 05:53, 20 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

possible addition, Donald Cline

edit

according to https://www.thedailybeast.com/netflixs-our-father-exposes-donald-cline-a-christian-cultist-doctor-who-secretly-fathered-94-children and upcoming (11 May 2022) Netflix doc. Need reference. GangofOne (talk) 21:23, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Comment from this Article's Original Principal Author

edit

I originally wrote the vast bulk of this article, taking it from a stub to a proper, scholarly, and appropriately extensive encyclopedia article. I did so under a couple of pseudonyms and bare IP. It's been years since I've revisited this page.

While some of the additions are helpful and a few offer updates, the article has largely become a hot mess. Even the writing is pretty terrible.

Can someone objectively revert and keep the older good while weeding through the new good? Here's a good starting point for comparison: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Quiverfull&diff=1192571345&oldid=664272191

47.12.225.19 (talk) 05:26, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Missing citation

edit

A general recent reworking of the article included a bunch of material from "Sweeney 2017" but did not expand on that source. I don't care at this point in my Wiki-semi-retirement to take the time to evaluate whether or not the source is adequate or to include a proper citation but it's a (approved?) doctorial thesis that can be found at https://escholarship.org/content/qt4kg7025d/qt4kg7025d_noSplash_51a2872a287826be98acb367a71b642b.pdf. TransporterMan (TALK) 20:22, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Recent edits

edit

I'm concerned about the quality of the recent edits to this article, as it seems to be promoting a pro-Quiverful point-of-view, creating a false balance. I have concerns about using sources such as this book. This article should summarize what reliable sources say about the Quiverfull movement, not what Quiverfull authors themselves advocate. So I've restored the latest revision before these bold changes. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 01:50, 23 March 2024 (UTC)Reply