The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Please supply full citations when adding information, and consider tagging or removing unciteable information.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Catholicism related articles 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.
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.
In summary the present ordering has something to do with neutrality issues (set em up and knock em down). Also, the criticisms are summarized first in the general section then the supporting views are given, then all the criticisms in toto.
When I heard Fox News's Rome correspondent was an active Opus-Deist, and is now working directly for the Vatican, I came here to check -- but I'm not totally shocked that there's no mention if it; mostly because it seems to be a new story, but also because may be construed as casting the organization in a less-than-positive light (well, both organizations). 220.127.116.11 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:46, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
I posted a question about reliability about a group similar to ODAN at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_136#Negative_ex-whatever_sources and the response was that ex-member organizations are urreliable sources. I think all the ODAN fits here. Some criticisms in the article are sourced to reliable sources but those only sourced to ODAN and extra ODAN references should probably be eliminated. Is that agreed or is there some reason to call ODAN reliable? >> Jesus Loves You!M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemus • feci) 10:33, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
Almost a month has gone by without objection. Today I eliminated all content from ODAN. >> Jesus Loves You!M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemus • feci) 17:15, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Opus Dei prelature not technically a Catholic movement nor a society
I would like to clarify that Opus Dei is technically not a movement nor a society, being a prelature that is more akin to a diocese and to military ordinariates that are institutional hierarchical structures organized by the Church itself and not from among laity.
Thus I removed the template for Catholic movements and societies. Lafem (talk) 07:00, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Technically (canonically), you're right. However, it has been classed with them in things like the two Pentecost events for movements in Rome (1998 & 2005), they are usually associated with them in pastoral plans and the minds of many in the Church , and it is a lay spirituality when the template was designed to grab all Catholic lay spiritualities. If you want to change the title of the template to be clearer, please do. "Society" was intended in a broad sense to include Opus Dei. If you want to debate the title or the inclusion of Opus Dei in the template, please do so there. As it stands, Opus Dei is a link in the Navbox (transcluded is the technical term) so the navbox should be included here per WP:NAVBOX. I undid your good faith edit.>> M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemus • feci) 19:03, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Selective summary of apostates reliability: dispute resolution seems to be necessary
In the past ten years I have repeatedly protested against quoting Wilson only as a summary of apostates reliability, but to no avail. I also have done this on Controversies surrounding Opus Dei. I will take it to dispute resolution notice board, because it seems we have not come any closer in all this time. Andries (talk) 15:29, 30 December 2013 (UTC)