2

The biblical-basis tag should be renamed to scriptural-basis just to make it explicit that it is the appropriate tag to use to ask for the basis of LDS beliefs.

We should treat them as synonyms really, so don't feel like you need to edit all current biblical basis questions to ask for the scriptural basis instead.

  • It's worth noting that mods can effectively retag all such questions at once. If we want to make biblical-basis a synonym of scriptural-basis and retag all questions with the former to have the latter, that's something like 4 clicks for a mod. – El'endia Starman Jun 6 '16 at 16:12
  • 1
    I hope this wouldn't mean that questions can no longer ask for the biblical basis of a belief using that terminology. – Lee Woofenden Jun 6 '16 at 21:06
  • 1
    @LeeWoofenden Indeed; the "biblical basis" language should not be avoided, and may even be preferred, in non-LDS questions. Questions should still specify which canon/scriptures they are referring to if context doesn't make it clear. – Nathaniel Jun 6 '16 at 21:32
  • @El'endiaStarman Yeah this is a request for the mods to do just that. We can wait another couple of days to see if any opposition arises. – curiousdannii Jun 7 '16 at 0:20
7

I'm not entirely convinced this is a good idea. I upvoted the question because at first bluff I agreed that the term isn't technically quite accurate in describing the range of things that fit under it here. However I'm concerned that we'll lose out on some factors if we rename it. ‘Biblical Basis’ is a bit of a buzz-word that has momentum outside of this site. ‘Scriptural Basis’ doesn't carry nearly the weight of common usage. There are less than half as many usages on the web. While this does mean some sites are using it (notably Catholic sites) an ever more telling metric is what people are searching for. Using Google Trends to compare search term usage, bibilical basis at least has a track record (even if it's trending down over the last decade), scriptural basis doesn't even trip the minimum usage to be graphable.

In other words people are more likely to be familiar with and searching for the tag as we have it named now. Accommodating a technically more accurate term that nobody is looking for or intuitively knows how to use seems like it might be a net loss.

  • 4
    Perhaps the tag wiki could say then that it's still the appropriate tag even when asking groups that recognise more than just the Bible as scripture – curiousdannii Jun 7 '16 at 6:11
  • 2
    @curiousdannii I could totally see that. – Caleb Jun 7 '16 at 7:19
2

This is an old question and I hope it's not inappropriate to chime in.

I support leaving the tag alone.

I believe few (if any) LDS members would missunderstand a question tagged and , meaning all LDS scripture may be used. However, I fear some of our members might misunderstand a question only tagged (no denominational reference) as open to all our scripture when the OP might not (and probably didn't) intend that.

I think the situation is much more clear using the tag as-is.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .