Talk:Daniel B. Wallace

This article was nominated for deletion on 2006 April 19. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal 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 articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Bible Low‑importance

	Bible portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible 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.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Untitled[edit]

Someone stated that Wallace is not even teaching at DTS; not true, he is presently teaching advanced Greek and exegesis of Romans.

Regarding the comment that DTS is a 'diploma mill?' Get serious.

Keep[edit]

Keep the article! This man is a professor at a famous univerity. We need his information. (LonghornJohnny 23:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC))[reply]

You'll be pleased to know that we travelled five months into the future to count your vote. The JPS ^{talk to me} 23:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC) (i.e. the voting process ended in April :P )[reply]

I will confess to being biased because Dr Wallace is my advisor at Dallas Seminary. Yet the notion that people who have had ZERO scholarly works - like Kenneth Copeland or Joyce Meyer, for example - are Wikipedia worthy but Wallace is not?

The guy has TWO second-year grammars for Greek. The first is the long edition replete with examples and commentary; the second one, called the Barney version due to its pink color, is condensed for liberal seminaries that teach Greek but do not want the evangelical commentary. His grammar is the most widely used second-year grammar out there (2/3 of the seminaries use it) - and it will last awhile because most of the old ones used the eight-case Greek noun method as opposed to the current five.

He was recognized within evangelical Christianity as an authority even before he was a tenured professor - appearing on The John Ankerberg Show on the KJV Only issue, and let's face it - some of those guys are Wiki worthy (Ruckman, James White).

He was also a student of Harry Sturz, who worked on the Majority Text. His 'significant finding' is that the number of 'distinctly Byzantine readings' Sturz argued for has been reduced from 150 to only eight; in other words, Wallace has DEMONSTRATED the proof of the Hortian hypothesis - the Byzantine text-type as a late development.

Gordon Fee is considered a textual scholar and Wiki worthy - yet Fee has not written a grammar and most folks would be hard pressed to name even one of Fee's actual works. Not knocking Fee - I like him, but it seems to me that if Fee is included, you have to include Wallace.

File:Daniel Wallace.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

	An image used in this article, File:Daniel Wallace.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

......is considered an evangelical authority?[edit]

Authority...? I doubt that...! Statements like this have to be proved by obective and reliable sources (which is NOT a webside, created by the person himself)... Evangelical authorities in textual criticism of the new testament are exclusively the main editors of the Novum Testamentum Graece (also called Nestle-Aland) and the Greek New Testament (who are Kurt Aland, Barbara Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo Maria Martini and Bruce Metzger). Wallace and the "Center for the Study of New Testament Manuskrips" is takin digital photographs, of already well-known manuscrips. Tischendorf and the Alands did expeditions and discovered a large number of unknown manuscripts. Kurt and Barbara Aland took photographs of all old and new discovered manuscripts in those years.... anyone who is interested in those things, please reade the Wikipedia-article on the Novum Testamentum Graece, the Greek New Testament and any of the listed renowned textual critics... I am going to remove the whole sentence in the article.....IntelligenzBaustein 17:30, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]