This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. European Microstates: Vatican City C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Microstates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of European Microstates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European MicrostatesWikipedia:WikiProject European MicrostatesTemplate:WikiProject European MicrostatesEuropean Microstates C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Vatican City (assessed as Top-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Christianity: Saints / Catholicism / Eastern O. / Oriental O. / Syriac / Anglicanism / Lutheranism / Latter Day Saints C‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  This article is supported by WikiProject Saints (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Oriental Orthodoxy. This article is within the scope of the Syriac Christianity work group, a task force which is currently considered to be inactive. This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Lutheranism (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement (assessed as High-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Religion C‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Template:WP1.0

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4

This article presents a lot of unfounded nonsense about a possibly fictional character as if it absolutely true. What it does is describe a mythological character, and perhaps could have a section on possible historicity. Otherwise it's pretty much a religious page that takes all the myths as true and never mentions that they might not be. Huw Powell (talk) 04:53, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article indicates that the Octagonal Church over the house of St. Peter in Capernaum is Franciscan, which would mean that it is Catholic. It could be Eastern Catholic... but there are no Franciscans in Orthodoxy, right? Elizium23 (talk) 05:27, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that Saint Peter is a very common way to refer to this man and that this would therefore be appropriate due to Wikipedia's common name rule; however, is there anything to be said about objectivity being placed above the common name? The "saint" title is subjective to certain Christian traditions, many people referring to this man regularly as simply "Peter" and not "Saint Peter". Latter-day Saints, many Protestants, and Muslims are among those who do not use the "saint" title while still referring to this man. I posit that this article should be titled Peter (disciple of Jesus) but won't put a move request in until I get a little feedback. —Wikipedian77 (talk) 14:43, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Peter → Peter (disciple of Jesus) – "Saint Peter"—while a very common name—is subjective to certain Christian traditions and is avoidable. Using Peter (disciple of Jesus) is objective, neutral, and suitable to all. The parenthetical clarification is used in articles such as Mary (mother of Jesus) and Michael (archangel). Many people regularly refer to this man without referring to him as "Saint Peter", including Latter-day Saints and many Protestants. Wikipedian77 (talk) 15:00, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Please read WP:COMMONNAME. Article names follow that. Move was also discussed just above and rejected. History2007 (talk) 15:11, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, this seems part of a larger sequence of requested moves by this user, may need a few of these to help. History2007 (talk) 15:17, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong oppose what History2007 said. --Dweller (talk) 15:15, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment History2007, I'm working hard to try and make Wikipedia more objective and neutral. Undermining these discussions is not appreciated. I also very much oppose the notion that historical Wikipedia decisions should dictate the fate of articles for the rest of the livelihood of Wikipedia. Objectivity should always be placed above Wikipedia politics, and I frankly am uncomfortable with this article title as I do not revere this man as a "Saint" nor would I ever refer to him as "Saint Peter". For some situations, this is inevitable (such as the "Boston Massacre"); however, for this article, Peter (disciple of Jesus) is available and is a more reasonable and objective name. A great parallel to this is that the article for "Saint Mary" is titled Mary (mother of Jesus). —Wikipedian77 (talk) 15:27, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't regard this Peter as a "Saint" any more than I regard his namesake as "Great", but COMMONNAME is sensible and well-established as Wikipedia policy. If I saw a Wikipedia article on "Peter (disciple of Jesus)", I'd assume it was about some other less-well known disciple called Peter that we have an article about in addition to one about the very famous disciple pretty much universally known as "Saint Peter". --Dweller (talk) 15:45, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The long and short of it is that WP:COMMONNAME rules. History2007 (talk) 15:48, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How does that explain the article title "Mary (mother of Jesus)" or "Michael (archangel)" when Saint Mary and Saint Michael are certainly the recognizable names of these respective persons? —Wikipedian77 (talk) 15:54, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I've never heard of her being called that, and only heard of him being called that in the context of Marks and Spencer. But assuming you're right, that's an WP:OTHERSTUFF argument that suggests we address those articles, not this one. --Dweller (talk) 15:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, in the section just above here, he directly acknowledged the COMMONNAME to be Saint Peter - so that discussion is over. Policy is clear: needs to use the COMMONNAME. The move request will fail per policy. My last comment here - unwatching now. History2007 (talk) 16:01, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Any support from users who want to see the highest possible amount of objectivity in Wikipedia article titles? —Wikipedian77 (talk) 16:05, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Support COMMONNAME means we use the most common name in reliable source, of which there are many for this subject. This, this, this, and this use Peter, without Saint. I don't see much/any discussion of reliable sources in previous discussions. --JFH (talk) 16:12, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That would imply that this article should be at Peter, with that page moved to, say, Peter (disambiguation). Not to Peter (disciple of Jesus) --Dweller (talk) 16:17, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that this Peter is the primary topic for Peter and would support that. But if I can't get that, I'd point out that Saint is not a helpful disambiguation because there are a lot of them. There is only one Peter (disciple of Jesus) and only one Peter the Apostle (I'd support either). --JFH (talk) 16:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - (ec) I see the problem, but think that the proposed new name is not a solution I can support. Coming from a Protestant background, I only found the article via redirect, and imagine it's even worse for people without any Christian background to associate a meaning to "Saint". Unfortunately, the same is true for "disciple", rather a technical Christian term also, whereas every reader will understand "mother (of Jesus)". Peter (Bible)? - The current lead says "Simon Peter, also known as Saint Peter", - also known, no more! It does not try to explain or at least link Saint. How can that be the article name? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:23, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]