This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek history 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 Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics 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.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons 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 sourcedmust 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 connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, please see this page.
This is a mess i'm not about to fix, partly out of fear that the anachronistic "of Constantinople" really is an accepted name for these Bishops of Byz. Felix is now piped directly to Felix of Byzantium, who is also now the target of several other redirects, but only bcz that's what it took to make sense of his entries on LoPbN, Felix, and maybe a few others. Someone with more commitment to this topic has a project waiting for them, to research the proper names for the red lks & create all the redirects that are implicit in the other versions already on WP. (For instance, even in the cases of 136 and 141, i didn't venture to reword the anachronism that may make some sense on this talk page's article, but is horribly misleading in contexts that are restricted to the 1st thru 3rd centuries.
--Jerzy·t 05:21, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Done. I'm still not sure if the article on Alexander (dead 337) has a wrong name. He's listed as Patriarch Alexander of Constantinople. Isn't his correct title Bishop, Archbishop or perhaps Metropolitan? As far as I know, the First Council of Constantinople elevated Constantinople to a patriarchate, but this was rejected by two popes, so the title wasn't established until the Council of Calchedon in 451. Thoughts anyone? --Valentinian 09:43, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
I've removed references to "Patriarch" this-or-that before 381 and re-named articles accordingly. The title was not used before that year. --Valentinian 21:14, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
I've fixed some of references PARTIALLY according to "Ecumencial Patriarchate of Constantinople", Encyclopedia Britannica 2005 Deluxe Edition CD-ROM., i.e. this-or-that of byzantium before 330, this-or-that of Constantinople between 330 and 381, patriarch this-or-that of Constantinople 381 onwards. I.H.S.V. [[User_talk:Ktsquare|(talk)]] 02:02, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Good folk, just to get a consensus of sorts - do you all think that every single Patriarch of Constantinople needs to have 'Oecumenical' (or 'Ecumenical' even) before 'Patriarch'? Surely nobody's going to mistake any other Patriarchate as the Oecumenical Patriarchate? Does anyone out there support renaming those individual patriarchs' articles back to plain old 'Patriarch so-and-so of Constantinople"? Hectorian's argument here, on reflection, I no longer find convincing. InfernoXV 21:21, 15 February 2007 (UTC)