On the one side of the spectrum, there are the guys that are clearly on topic - the classical "greats" of the faith:
Basically, if people know you by just one name, you're pretty clear on topic. Somewhere in the middle are the theologians that really smart people add in:
If your seminary professor has mentioned them, you're probably on target. Now, to their credit, all of these guys have the advantage of being dead. There is another category - the guys who are still alive, but undoubtedly important:
And, finally, you have the "popular, but probably not classic" contemporaries
On the other end of the spectrum, you'd have:
I'm sure we can all name our own personal person's profile to put a link to here. No matter how tempted you are, please do not do that. Be nice!
Guidelines for determining the line
Of all these categories, Only this last category would be what I consider "too localized." So, where is this line?
- If there is a Wikipedia entry authored by someone other than the target, you're probably on topic. Otherwise, you are probably a bit too local. The distinction is pretty simple - we want to know about the same kinds of things that would pass Wikipedia's "notablity" criterion. We don't care about "your opinion."
- If this person has a published work of theology, then you definately have something on topic. The point is typically the theology anyways, so what makes it on point is that it is a source that can be read by proponents and detractors alike, using the author's own words as a valid viewpoint.
What is the reason for requiring "notability" and/or disallowing "personal" theology?
Simply put, theology means challenging assumptions and pointing out internal contradictions. This can only be done when there is a corpus of theology that can be referenced by both adherents and critics alike.
Additionally, this site is not a place for working out theology - it is for the examination of extant theology. In the same way that lawyers have a "discovery phase," in which evidence is considered before introduction, so too new theology may not be simply introduced whenever one feels like it. This site is for critiquing and understanding existing theology, not introducing theology that would be called "peculiar," "novel," or "innovative."