Jump to content

Talk:List of canonically crowned images

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please do not speculate on future events

[edit]

Per WP:CRYSTAL, we may not add future events to articles before they actually happen. I have removed about three future "coronations" due to violations. Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 22:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mexico: 'Marian or Josephian'

[edit]

Why 'or Josephian'? All the images are Nuestra Senora, Our Lady, or Virgen.--2607:FEA8:D5DF:F3D9:75FD:9C5:E8BC:345A (talk) 19:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Recent changings

[edit]

Dear iP 2603:8000:2A03:9DF9:E8D9:8213:86DE:491:, 2603:8000:2A03:9DF9:8595:B537:FB25:D787 (and future various) what is the point in your changings, for example from (correct) English to Spanish, if the Spanish is spelt all wrong? Luzifernam: what is the point in changing correct spelling into something other? Both(?) of you produce a lot of work which has to be fixed by others. What is the point in such statements [1]?

I am not interested in an edit war, but I will change back at least Canòlich back to the appropriate spelling. --Medusahead (talk) 10:24, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing

[edit]

I just blocked 2603:8000:2A42:AE98:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) for a long history of disruptive edits: copyright violations (see the notices above), an almost complete lack of explanations and edit summaries, and when there's an edit summary it's often weird and rude. I see now, from a note by Medusahead, that such edits have been made from this range for years now. I'll also ping User:Da Boauss Ss, who's dealt with the IP's edits. IP, you don't seem to have much interest in talk page discussion, but I'm telling you, this kind of stuff is unacceptable. Drmies (talk) 00:39, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article is too long to read and navigate comfortably.

[edit]

According to Special:LongPages, this article is the 3rd largest at ~662k bytes. I looked at the section sizes and saw that Italy is the largest section at ~205k bytes, which is one massive table. I suggest that the article is split such that the Italy section has its own article, with the table split by century. I believe this will make the article easier to read and navigate. Any thoughts? zsteve21 (talk) 15:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! Yes, I don’t see why not. As long as this page may be navigated comfortably by our readers. Same thing has been done with List of Catholic basilicas, with Italy and Germany having their own respective articles. It should somehow shorten this since this a page this long also takes up some time to load. Da Boauss Ss (talk) 00:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]