Talk:Westminster Theological Centre
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that an image or photograph of Westminster Theological Centre be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. Wikipedians in Gloucestershire may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Untitled
editIt's worth commenting on the issue of notability, that the centre has grown from virtually a standing start in two years to now having more people enrolled (on half time courses) than all the "bible colleges" have full time students. Ender's Shadow Snr (talk) 20:32, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
- That's not how notability works on Wikipedia though - see WP:NOTABILITY. In short, what establishes notability is not anything intrinsic to the subject, but having eg articles about the place written by independent third parties. And that doesn't mean passing mentions in some list of courses, but proper articles where the centre is the primary subject. If it has been successful as you say, then it should be easy to find such articles in the THES or the Theological Colleges Monthly or something. Le Deluge (talk) 15:36, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
I need a freind who can help me Ferdygift91 (talk) 23:24, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Kingdom Theology
editNot sure that the courses are as specialist Kingdom theology as might appear ... however they do say that is what they teach ... but may be more mainstream than implied by use of the title. Springnuts (talk) 09:59, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
I need to know more about theology and westmenster Ferdygift91 (talk) 22:39, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
1st Principal
editJust to note this: [[1]]. Springnuts (talk) 10:11, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Neutrality Issues
editThis article appears to have issues with POV / neutrality, especially in the "Hubs" subheading. Frequent uses of the first and second person (eg: "our hubs", "your fellow students") and promotional language (eg: the "creative model" and "unique flavour" of the program) make this read more like an advertisement than an encyclopedia entry. This is especially problematic given the notability issues already mentioned by other editors. I've added a note about neutrality issues to the template at the beginning of the article. Even if/when notability is proven, I think the page would need a major rewrite by a disinterested person to meet style guidelines. --SongOfMyShelf (talk) 17:15, 16 August 2018 (UTC)