Talk:Holy Week - Revision history

Ian.Climacus: /* Lazarus Saturday - discrepancy between Great Lent and Holy Week articles */

2012-05-10T05:56:35Z

‎Lazarus Saturday - discrepancy between Great Lent and Holy Week articles

Wsk at 17:17, April 8, 2012

2012-04-08T17:17:28Z

Ian.Climacus: /* Lazarus Saturday - discrepancy between Great Lent and Holy Week articles */ new section

2012-04-08T02:04:22Z

‎Lazarus Saturday - discrepancy between Great Lent and Holy Week articles: new section

ASDamick: /* Right icon */

2009-04-16T19:15:18Z

‎Right icon

Jeffholton at 17:22, April 16, 2009

2009-04-16T17:22:00Z

Ixthis888 at 03:05, January 15, 2008

2008-01-15T03:05:56Z

ASDamick at 02:52, January 15, 2008

2008-01-15T02:52:28Z

Ixthis888: /* request to include Holy Week 'Traditions' as a topic in the article */

2008-01-14T01:06:21Z

‎request to include Holy Week 'Traditions' as a topic in the article

Gabriela at 00:48, January 14, 2008

2008-01-14T00:48:21Z

Ixthis888 at 22:40, January 13, 2008

2008-01-13T22:40:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:56, May 10, 2012
Line 35:		Line 35:
	Ian.		Ian.
	:On this issue one has to remember that the Church uses as its liturgical calendar the Old Testament concept of a day as beginning at sundown, not the Roman concept of beginning at midnight. So, the Saturday of Lazarus begins at sundown, the "eve" on the civil calendar day of Friday. Thus, the two articles are saying the same thing, only "eve of Lazarus Saturday" tends to confuse by introducing the concept of the civil day, when we are talking about the beginning of the Church day. [[User:Wsk\|Wsk]] 07:17, April 8, 2012 (HST)		:On this issue one has to remember that the Church uses as its liturgical calendar the Old Testament concept of a day as beginning at sundown, not the Roman concept of beginning at midnight. So, the Saturday of Lazarus begins at sundown, the "eve" on the civil calendar day of Friday. Thus, the two articles are saying the same thing, only "eve of Lazarus Saturday" tends to confuse by introducing the concept of the civil day, when we are talking about the beginning of the Church day. [[User:Wsk\|Wsk]] 07:17, April 8, 2012 (HST)
		+
		+	::Thank you; a clear and helpful explanation, Ian. 15:56, May 10, 2012 (AEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:17, April 8, 2012
Line 34:		Line 34:
	Have I lost the plot? Am I misreading? Any comments/thoughts appreciated,		Have I lost the plot? Am I misreading? Any comments/thoughts appreciated,
	Ian.		Ian.
		+	:On this issue one has to remember that the Church uses as its liturgical calendar the Old Testament concept of a day as beginning at sundown, not the Roman concept of beginning at midnight. So, the Saturday of Lazarus begins at sundown, the "eve" on the civil calendar day of Friday. Thus, the two articles are saying the same thing, only "eve of Lazarus Saturday" tends to confuse by introducing the concept of the civil day, when we are talking about the beginning of the Church day. [[User:Wsk\|Wsk]] 07:17, April 8, 2012 (HST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:04, April 8, 2012
Line 17:		Line 17:

	: You're right that they're not the same. I'm not sure why they're being identified here. —[[User:ASDamick\|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick\|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick\|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy\|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 19:15, April 16, 2009 (UTC)		: You're right that they're not the same. I'm not sure why they're being identified here. —[[User:ASDamick\|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick\|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick\|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy\|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 19:15, April 16, 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Lazarus Saturday - discrepancy between Great Lent and Holy Week articles ==
		+
		+	Hi all,
		+
		+	First a big thank you to all who have made this site the treasury it is of Orthodox information.
		+
		+	It may be that the lack of meat is impacting my comprehension!, but as I was reading the Great Lent and Holy Week articles I could not reconcile two sentences:
		+
		+	Great Lent article: "[Great Lent] concludes '''on the eve of Lazarus Saturday'''..."; which I take to mean Friday -- 40 days from the first Monday of Great Lent to Friday of the Sixth Week giving the 40 Days of Great Lent
		+
		+	Holy Week article: "Great and Holy Week is the week from the conclusion of Great Lent '''on the Saturday of Lazarus'''" and "Lazarus Saturday concludes Great Lent"
		+
		+	The Lazarus Saturday article has "On the eve of the celebration of the Resurrection of Lazarus, the forty days of Great Lent are formally brought to an end at Vespers.", which seems to agree with the Great Lent article
		+
		+	Have I lost the plot? Am I misreading? Any comments/thoughts appreciated,
		+	Ian.

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:15, April 16, 2009
Line 15:		Line 15:
	== Right icon ==		== Right icon ==
	Is that really an icon of the Bridegroom? I have seen the "Great Humility" icon before, but I never associated the two as liturgically identical. [[User:Jeffholton\|Theophilus]] 17:22, April 16, 2009 (UTC)		Is that really an icon of the Bridegroom? I have seen the "Great Humility" icon before, but I never associated the two as liturgically identical. [[User:Jeffholton\|Theophilus]] 17:22, April 16, 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	: You're right that they're not the same. I'm not sure why they're being identified here. —[[User:ASDamick\|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick\|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick\|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy\|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 19:15, April 16, 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:22, April 16, 2009
Line 11:		Line 11:

	:::: Hi! I have been trying to keep that rule with the big articles. Getting the hang of it - and any 'whining' (hehe) I try to keep local to the discussion page until I understand the thinking. OK, if I am doing anything wrong just ask me politely remember. I am happy to be co-operating and you will see heaps of articles from me. Vasiliki (Ixthis888) [[User:Ixthis888\|Vicki]] 19:05, January 14, 2008 (PST)		:::: Hi! I have been trying to keep that rule with the big articles. Getting the hang of it - and any 'whining' (hehe) I try to keep local to the discussion page until I understand the thinking. OK, if I am doing anything wrong just ask me politely remember. I am happy to be co-operating and you will see heaps of articles from me. Vasiliki (Ixthis888) [[User:Ixthis888\|Vicki]] 19:05, January 14, 2008 (PST)
		+
		+
		+	== Right icon ==
		+	Is that really an icon of the Bridegroom? I have seen the "Great Humility" icon before, but I never associated the two as liturgically identical. [[User:Jeffholton\|Theophilus]] 17:22, April 16, 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:05, January 15, 2008
Line 9:		Line 9:

	::: Anything that has been removed can always be reverted—all edits in an article's edit history can be recovered by any editor (unless it has been removed from the history by an administrator, as is often done in the case of obscene vandalism). The main thing to remember is that articles are not scratch-pads, especially not the more developed ones. (That's what the [[OrthodoxWiki:Sandbox\|Sandbox]] or one's own userspace is for.) What is added to an article should be "ready for press" when it's added. Major changes to developed articles should usually be proposed on the Talk page first. —[[User:ASDamick\|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick\|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick\|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]</small> 18:52, January 14, 2008 (PST)		::: Anything that has been removed can always be reverted—all edits in an article's edit history can be recovered by any editor (unless it has been removed from the history by an administrator, as is often done in the case of obscene vandalism). The main thing to remember is that articles are not scratch-pads, especially not the more developed ones. (That's what the [[OrthodoxWiki:Sandbox\|Sandbox]] or one's own userspace is for.) What is added to an article should be "ready for press" when it's added. Major changes to developed articles should usually be proposed on the Talk page first. —[[User:ASDamick\|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick\|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick\|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]</small> 18:52, January 14, 2008 (PST)
		+
		+	:::: Hi! I have been trying to keep that rule with the big articles. Getting the hang of it - and any 'whining' (hehe) I try to keep local to the discussion page until I understand the thinking. OK, if I am doing anything wrong just ask me politely remember. I am happy to be co-operating and you will see heaps of articles from me. Vasiliki (Ixthis888) [[User:Ixthis888\|Vicki]] 19:05, January 14, 2008 (PST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:52, January 15, 2008
Line 6:		Line 6:
	:Vasiliki: Yes, I don't see why not! That sounds excellent, and please go ahead and add this section if you'd like. Anything that relates to Orthodoxy and adds (correct) information to the main article topic is always welcome, no permission needed. [[User:Gabriela\|Gabriela]] 16:48, January 13, 2008 (PST)		:Vasiliki: Yes, I don't see why not! That sounds excellent, and please go ahead and add this section if you'd like. Anything that relates to Orthodoxy and adds (correct) information to the main article topic is always welcome, no permission needed. [[User:Gabriela\|Gabriela]] 16:48, January 13, 2008 (PST)

−	::Gabriela: I wanted to ask because last week someone removed an entire section of information and I was pretty disappointed that they did that. They then snapped at me that I should 'ask permission' before adding things to articles. So .... as a courtesy I thought I would ask because it is one of the more major topics. Thanks again for your help. [[User:Ixthis888:~~Vasiliki~~]	+	::Gabriela: I wanted to ask because last week someone removed an entire section of information and I was pretty disappointed that they did that. They then snapped at me that I should 'ask permission' before adding things to articles. So .... as a courtesy I thought I would ask because it is one of the more major topics. Thanks again for your help. [[User:Ixthis888\|Vasiliki]]
		+
		+	::: Anything that has been removed can always be reverted—all edits in an article's edit history can be recovered by any editor (unless it has been removed from the history by an administrator, as is often done in the case of obscene vandalism). The main thing to remember is that articles are not scratch-pads, especially not the more developed ones. (That's what the [[OrthodoxWiki:Sandbox\|Sandbox]] or one's own userspace is for.) What is added to an article should be "ready for press" when it's added. Major changes to developed articles should usually be proposed on the Talk page first. —[[User:ASDamick\|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick\|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick\|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]</small> 18:52, January 14, 2008 (PST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:06, January 14, 2008
Line 5:		Line 5:

	:Vasiliki: Yes, I don't see why not! That sounds excellent, and please go ahead and add this section if you'd like. Anything that relates to Orthodoxy and adds (correct) information to the main article topic is always welcome, no permission needed. [[User:Gabriela\|Gabriela]] 16:48, January 13, 2008 (PST)		:Vasiliki: Yes, I don't see why not! That sounds excellent, and please go ahead and add this section if you'd like. Anything that relates to Orthodoxy and adds (correct) information to the main article topic is always welcome, no permission needed. [[User:Gabriela\|Gabriela]] 16:48, January 13, 2008 (PST)
		+
		+	::Gabriela: I wanted to ask because last week someone removed an entire section of information and I was pretty disappointed that they did that. They then snapped at me that I should 'ask permission' before adding things to articles. So .... as a courtesy I thought I would ask because it is one of the more major topics. Thanks again for your help. [[User:Ixthis888:Vasiliki]

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:48, January 14, 2008
Line 3:		Line 3:

	I would like to see a heading in the Encyclopedia article with TRADITIONS and sub-headings for different areas of orthodoxy describing their 'traditions' ... Is this acceptable as per the rules? Vasiliki (Ixthis888) 14:38, January 13, 2008 (PST)		I would like to see a heading in the Encyclopedia article with TRADITIONS and sub-headings for different areas of orthodoxy describing their 'traditions' ... Is this acceptable as per the rules? Vasiliki (Ixthis888) 14:38, January 13, 2008 (PST)
		+
		+	:Vasiliki: Yes, I don't see why not! That sounds excellent, and please go ahead and add this section if you'd like. Anything that relates to Orthodoxy and adds (correct) information to the main article topic is always welcome, no permission needed. [[User:Gabriela\|Gabriela]] 16:48, January 13, 2008 (PST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:40, January 13, 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	== request to include Holy Week 'Traditions' as a topic in the article ==
	As an Orthodox, I would love to say that Holy Week is the most beautiful part of being Orthodox. The lenten preparation, the liturgical services, the cultural preparation that goes into participating in our Lord's death and then resurrection is what makes being Orthodox worth it. There are so many wonderful traditions associated with this week depending on where you come from in the world.		As an Orthodox, I would love to say that Holy Week is the most beautiful part of being Orthodox. The lenten preparation, the liturgical services, the cultural preparation that goes into participating in our Lord's death and then resurrection is what makes being Orthodox worth it. There are so many wonderful traditions associated with this week depending on where you come from in the world.

−	I would like to see a heading in the Encyclopedia article with TRADITIONS and sub-headings for different areas of orthodoxy describing their 'traditions' ... Is this acceptable as per the rules? 14:38, January 13, 2008 (PST)	+	I would like to see a heading in the Encyclopedia article with TRADITIONS and sub-headings for different areas of orthodoxy describing their 'traditions' ... Is this acceptable as per the rules? Vasiliki (Ixthis888) 14:38, January 13, 2008 (PST)