Talk:List of saints

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Date Since 450?[edit]

There are numerous saints on this list from before 450. Either they should be removed, or the table should be opened to all saints, not just those since 450. I favour the latter option as this would mean a large number of saints recognised by all groups would be included and Wiki, as a source of information, ought to include such a list.


I think this article should be split into multiple articles... for instance List of Saints in the Catholic Church... also created an article for Anglican, Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, and Lutheran. Shark96z (talk) 13:18, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Maybe it could work as a page for saints of only of the Catholic Church-- and one for folks held to be saints by more than one church. Otherwise this would create a need for a lot of multiple updates. How would we correct and update them together? Carlaude:Talk 20:13, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
I agree, and that would probably work. Definitely the Catholics, but should the blesseds and etc be included? If the saints of those four sects are wikiworthy, what about every other sect that has saints? --15lsoucy (talk) 03:32, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • No clear support or consensus for split given that such a split may create more problems than necessary. Split declined. SilkTork *Tea time 23:50, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Rather than simply saying "Yes" or a date, this chart should include how a Church refers to a saint, e.g. "Blessed", "Venerable", "Saint", "Passion Bearer", etc.

This table should remain as it is useful for comparing which saints are recognised across jurisdictions. As the various Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox saints are not all recognised by all jurisdictions, should there be separate columns for them? Or should there be a rule regarding what degree of recognition is required for listing?

The saints of the Assyrian Church of the East is not included in this table. There should be a column for this ancient group also.

Saint Paul[edit]

Never mind. This article is Saints since 450 CE -- I didn't realize that. Geĸrίtzl (talk) 23:48, 29 June 2010 (UTC) J: James may, as far as i know is not a saint. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ponyandpit (talkcontribs) 10:25, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Remove the section headings A B C D etc.[edit]

The tables are sortable. The alpha sections make it impossible to quickly find the latest saint, group all the Anglican, Roman Catholic etc. I would like to remove the section headings and make it into one big table. Objections? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:20, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Speak now or forever hold your mouse away from the undo button. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:35, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Rough sample here. Date column doesn't sort that well, but all-in-all, an improvement. Comments welcome. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:13, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:27, 9 May 2011 (UTC)


Pardon me but I have some suggestions for the article - (which I cannot implement myself/feel woefully unqualified to do so...I'm fairly new and never touched tables before) so I would suggest the following - redo the table to include DOB as well as DOD, and most importantly make room each date of canonization (if known or applicable) - this should be possible if the large amount of blank space after the saints' names was reduces/shortened, and extra sections added. If this is possible it would improve the data. --Kawaii-Soft (talk) 20:17, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

I would be happy to do that. I don't expect others will challenge this as unconstructive, so I will go ahead make it so.
One thing that's tricky is making the dates sortable. Sometimes we see items like "5th century" and "November 1918" and "December 18, 1918". We need to convert those to {{sort|600|5th century}} and {{sort|2018.11|November 1918}} and {{sort|2018.12|December 1918}}
I'll get started on the extra columns thing, and others can slowly add in the sorting templates over time. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:48, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Example of sorting template[edit]

In this example edit, the number before the decimal represents the century and the number after the decimal represents the month and day. This should sort it correctly. This needs to be done for all items that are other than a simple year.

  • April 15, 1852 --> {{sort|1952.0415|April 15, 1852}}
  • January 28, 1908 --> {{sort|2008.0128|January 28, 1908}}
  • October 5, 2003 --> {{sort|2103.1005|October 5, 2003}}

The reason that this sorting method may be better than column heading sorting is because of the large variety of date presentations. If someone has a better plan, please say. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:26, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll see if I can run the table through a series of macros to automatically add some of the sorting. With 500-100 visitors a day to this page, I think it's worth getting the sortability looked after. Once done, I we can view or hardsort the entire thing chronologically. That would be nice and visitors would like it. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:20, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:24, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

King Charles I[edit]

Is it correct that he was canonised? Neither of the articles linked says so.Dudley Miles (talk) 13:20, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

New saints[edit]

Should these be entered?

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:24, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Not even close[edit]

There are more than 10,000 Catholic saints, even after the Church cleaned up the calendar in 1969 and removed several hundred of them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:49, 15 April 2016 (UTC)