Talk:Lux Mundi
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion (permalink).
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Latin. Obvious SOP. Plus, the capitalisation is wrong. It's a millimetre away from being speedied imho. This, that and the other (talk) 10:54, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete – in lower case SOP, and when capitalized a proper noun that may be encyclopedic not lexical. For the curious, the term derives from the Latin text of John 8:12. 14:01, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, we do have Light of the World. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:00, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- I don't see how this is any worse than anything else in Category:Divine epithets like Redeemer of Mankind, Prince of Peace, etc. (Sidenote: this category is very incomplete, and is missing e.g. content not only from Christianity, but also things like اَلرَّحْمَٰن (ar-raḥmān).) 70.172.194.25 20:08, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, someone and their sock have been very active creating Christian divine epithets, mostly of Jesus Christ, particularly on 26 December 2011. (Also: Captain of Man's Salvation · Father of Heaven and Earth · Fortitude of the Martyrs · Glory of Heaven · Joy of Angels · King of Glory · King of Patriarchs · Light of the Prophets · Purity of Virgins · Redeemer of the World · Sanctity of Confessors · Sun of Justice.) I have my doubts about most as qualifying in the sense that they are understood to refer to Jesus Christ in a context that does not already makes this clear (as it does in, “Jesus, the Redeemer, comes. He is Purity itself: He is the immaculate Lamb of God: He is the Purity of Virgins: He is the Lover of Chastity.” [1] ) --Lambiam 20:56, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- "Someone and their sock"? About half-and-half WF and User:Doremitzwr, which is a very, very odd combination. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:45, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, someone and their sock have been very active creating Christian divine epithets, mostly of Jesus Christ, particularly on 26 December 2011. (Also: Captain of Man's Salvation · Father of Heaven and Earth · Fortitude of the Martyrs · Glory of Heaven · Joy of Angels · King of Glory · King of Patriarchs · Light of the Prophets · Purity of Virgins · Redeemer of the World · Sanctity of Confessors · Sun of Justice.) I have my doubts about most as qualifying in the sense that they are understood to refer to Jesus Christ in a context that does not already makes this clear (as it does in, “Jesus, the Redeemer, comes. He is Purity itself: He is the immaculate Lamb of God: He is the Purity of Virgins: He is the Lover of Chastity.” [1] ) --Lambiam 20:56, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- I don't see how this is any worse than anything else in Category:Divine epithets like Redeemer of Mankind, Prince of Peace, etc. (Sidenote: this category is very incomplete, and is missing e.g. content not only from Christianity, but also things like اَلرَّحْمَٰن (ar-raḥmān).) 70.172.194.25 20:08, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, we do have Light of the World. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:00, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- It's worth noting that besides John 8:12, there is also Matthew 5:14 where Jesus uses it to refer to his followers instead of himself. The way I see it is that the Vulgate itself cannot be used to support an idiomatic meaning for "lux mundi" as "Jesus", since it can be read literally and it's not obviously a lexicalized term. But if later Christian authors used the Latin epithet to refer to Jesus, e.g. if you would find something like (to make up some examples) "The Light of the World died on the cross", or "O Light of the World, hear my prayer", that cannot be discounted. So it's a citation issue. 70.172.194.25 23:26, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
I have sent this to RfV. See also Wiktionary:Requests for verification/English § Light of the World. --Lambiam 19:12, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for cleanup (permalink).
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Latin. Tagged but not listed. The comment was "la [or en?]", which I interpret to mean that it may be SOP in Latin itself but entryworthy in English. Maybe a case for RFV rather than RFC in that case. —Mahāgaja (formerly Angr) · talk 17:49, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
- Originally it was Lux Mundi but head "lūx mundī". That didn't fit.
The senses don't seem to fit too: "3. Light is Protecting the World [Lux est prōtegēns Mundi]". The meaning seems to translate the Latin sentence and not just "Lux Mundi" or "lux mundi". -84.161.47.237 05:09, 25 March 2018 (UTC)- I'm sending the Latin to RFD with a recommendation to speedy as blatant SOP. As for English, it seems to have various meanings but none look entryworthy. This, that and the other (talk) 10:48, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.
Latin. See Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/Non-English § Lux Mundi and Wiktionary:Requests for verification/English § Light of the World. --Lambiam 19:10, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Someone should check whether any of these are viable: [2]. 70.172.194.25 19:27, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Lambiam: I added some quotations which I think fulfil your criterion that "readers are supposed to understand, without being told so, [what] this term refers to", in contrast to the current citations at English Light of the World. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 22:14, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you. --Lambiam 13:02, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
- @Lambiam: I added some quotations which I think fulfil your criterion that "readers are supposed to understand, without being told so, [what] this term refers to", in contrast to the current citations at English Light of the World. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 22:14, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
RFV-passed. 70.172.194.25 22:37, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Al-Muqanna Actually, on closer examination, the capitalization of the entry title doesn't match the quotes. Should the entry be moved? Or perhaps there are other Latin sources that do capitalize this, so it should stay as it is? 70.172.194.25 07:00, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- It can be moved if desired, I'm indifferent about the capitalisation of Latin entries like this one since it's so inconsistent in practice. It does seem that it's more common uncapitalised in published editions. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 09:47, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'm indifferent too. 70.172.194.25 09:32, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
- It can be moved if desired, I'm indifferent about the capitalisation of Latin entries like this one since it's so inconsistent in practice. It does seem that it's more common uncapitalised in published editions. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 09:47, 28 December 2022 (UTC)