Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Catholicism / Canon law (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This page is supported by the Canon Law task force.
 
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Wikipedia:WikiProject Catholicism:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
Emblem of Vatican City.svg
Catholicism
WikiProject
Última Cena - Juan de Juanes.jpg
General information
Main project page talk
Christianity WikiProject talk
Members talk
To-do list talk
Popular pages -
Assessment talk
Canon law Task Force talk
Collaboration talk
Strategy talk
Terminology talk
Project category talk
Catholicism Portal talk
Project templates
Project banner talk
Footer navbox talk
Popes navbox talk
Catholic
Encyclopedia
talk
edit · changes

Changing name from "Catholicism" to "Catholic Church"?[edit]

Catholic versus Roman Catholic[edit]

This discussion is still open and more input is probably necessary. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:55, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

@Marcocapelle: It seems done. Do you intend to make a similar post about the equivalent issues in Category:Catholic Church, such as from Category:History of Roman Catholicism to Category:History of the Catholic Church (along with corresponding articles)? Chicbyaccident (talk) 10:03, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

@Marcocapelle: Well done. However not equivalent subcategories, are they? Also wondering about other equivalent cases in Category:Catholic Church. Chicbyaccident (talk) 10:37, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
It seems to me that you have the technical expertise to be more fitted for that than I am, though. Chicbyaccident (talk) 11:21, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Renaming of "Roman Catholic" to "Catholic"[edit]

Yet again, I see User:Chicbyaccident is renaming things from "Roman Catholic" to "Catholic", e.g. Template talk:Roman Catholic Archbishops of Brisbane with the edit summary WP:Consistency. And a glance at the user's contributions shows that many other articles etc have been similarly renamed, as well as many other articles renamed in other ways also citing "WP:Consistency" in the edit summary.

In [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism/Archive 2016#Renaming of Australian articles from "Roman Catholic ...." to "Catholic ...."] I have previously raised concerns about this type of renaming by this editor and the subsequent discussions revealed that there was no decision taken by this WikiProject to do this kind of renaming. Has there been some discussion that I cannot see here in which there was subsequently some agreement to make such changes? As far as I can see, this Brisbane template contains only Roman Catholic archbishops in a Roman Catholic Diocese. Where is the consensus for this? Kerry (talk) 13:30, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Well, WP:Consistency was according to its main category. Rather humble extent of reference, isn't it? While at it - what poses the problem of such category-internal consistancy according to you, talking about this specific item? Chicbyaccident (talk) 13:48, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
Since you know I have previously raised concerns about these changes and there did not appear to be the consensus you claimed, naturally I am very concerned when I see the same changes happening again in the absence of any apparent consensus here. These templates are all within WikiProject Australia as well as WikiProject Catholicism. Please include that project in your discussion. Wikipedia is built on consensus. Kerry (talk) 14:10, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
It seems 'Catholic' may be the common name now, although I have no figures to back that up aside from this n-gram Chicbyaccident's bold moves may be ahead of the curve and in line with the common name but, again, I'm not coming in with much evidence aside from personal observations and the n-gram. Randy Kryn 14:16, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
For reasons I've previously discussed in WP:Catholic or Roman Catholic?, I oppose changing the naming conventions from Catholic to Roman Catholic, except when it adds clarity. In the case of dioceses and related articles, adding "Roman Catholic" to the name succinctly identifies it as in communion with the pope, especially among similarly named non-Catholic entities. For instance, there is an Archdiocese of Hartford, and a Diocese of Connecticut - which is the Catholic one? Even though each article name would be unique, they still geographically overlap. Similarly, there is Diocese of Philadelphia and an Archdiocese of Philadelphia - which one is the Episcopalian? The article title Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Philadelphia clearly conveys which entity is being discussed. Chicbyaccident's argument in the edit summaries is that it more "consistent" to remove "Roman Catholic". Yet, given the benefits of distinguishing overlapping regions, we risk a patch work of ambiguous article unless we consistently use a single convention. Now, one could argue that "Catholic Archdiocese of Philadelphia" could be an alternative. However, we then run into to the Diocese of Pennsylvania - an Old Catholic Diocese! So in some areas, we will have an Episcopal Diocese, a Roman Catholic Diocese, and an Old Catholic Diocese. As far as I am concerned, it makes the simplest way of keeping all these straight is explicitly append Roman Catholic, Episcopal, or Old Catholic to the article title. Otherwise, the opening lines of each article are going to spend many words communicating what a clear and consistent article naming convention could convey. --Zfish118talk 17:22, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
On the diocesan level it can get quite messy. My general thoughts are that it should reflect what the diocese/archdiocese/eparchy calls itself unless there is a clear need to disambiguate. At the same time, that runs into problems where the diocese refers to itself as Catholic Diocese of Foo but the legal personhood of the bishop is Roman Catholic Bishop of Foo, which is the case in at least several dioceses that I can think of off of the top of my head. For this case, I think keeping it Roman Catholic makes sense because the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Brisbane uses Roman Catholic. If there is an RM on that page, and it is moved, I would also be fine moving moving the template. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:29, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Didn't you just answer yourself? Old Catholic sufficiently clearly is not the same as Catholic. For other, exceptionate cases, they could well also be treated in exceptionate manners. Chicbyaccident (talk) 19:24, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

I am not sure I understand what you mean, and it may be a language barrier. Could you please clarify? --Zfish118talk 22:13, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
I meant that "Catholic" typically refers to things related to the Catholic Church. As for other meanings of "Catholic", there is Independent Catholic, Old Catholic, Anglican Catholic, etc. Problem solved. Chicbyaccident (talk) 12:54, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Not solved - there is a need for consensus - if editing is done by WP:AGF - rather than proving the logic to yourself, and going off an editing further in your own self ascertained logic - it would be also much more diplomatic to see whether the editors who have commented here so far, wish to return or comment further - exceptionate ? - this is english wikipedia - the word does not hit my dictionaries.

This topic is a major naming convention issue, that needs others to clarify whether they can agree with your changes - from reading above, there is not a general consensus as to your interpretation or actions to date. JarrahTree 13:24, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Various moves and not moves require a central point of reference, surely[edit]

and the relevant discussions that followed or precede those moves - if for nothing else, as something to base any further discusssion, but noting editing in the last 2 hours, there is substantial change whether anyone has discussed it or not JarrahTree 13:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)


  • Comment: I would view the above "N-gram" with caution. At a minimum, "Catholic" seems to be double counting itself within the phrase "Roman Catholic", given the similar peaks and troughs of the the two graphs. Secondly, there will simply be more contexts where the word "Catholic" is used, where as "Roman Catholic" can refer to only a limited number of topics. It is impossible to tell from the graph whether "Catholic" is being used in the context of the name of the church or not. --Zfish118talk 22:47, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure if I've found the right place to remark on this page. However, I got here from a notice at WP:AWNB about the ((Roman) Catholic) Archdiocese of Brisbane, and the naming of articles and templates relating to it. Someone else may refactor my comment to the right place on the page if this is not it. My context is from outside of Catholic traditions, as an Australian protestant. The simple "central point of reference" I choose is the first sentence of this project page: WikiProject Catholicism is a group dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the Catholic Church, including the Latin and Eastern Catholic churches in communion with the Holy See.. Clearly this wikiproject considers Eastern Catholic churches to be different to Roman Catholic/Latin Church churches, but still "Catholic". We recently made a point of naming Australian articles to include the denomination in their titles where relevant for consitency, even when not required for disambiguation. Some Anglican and Roman Catholic dioceses had matching names, so all were named to include the denomination even if they did not conflict, and Uniting Church in Australia synods (roughly-equivalent regional councils) got the denomination name in their titles too. Without any reference point of how many "non-Roman/Latin" Catholic churches/dioceses/bishops/whatever that there might be in Australia, it is clearly appropriate to name articles that could be misleading with sufficient precision to avoid that confusion. Hence if it is necessary to say "Catholic", and non-Romans are not included, then the article/template should be titled "Roman Catholic". --Scott Davis Talk 11:49, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Please consider reviewing Catholic Church#Name, Roman Catholic (term), and Talk:Catholic Church in Armenia, in order not to be one of those users who are new to the discussion and who stop by on perhaps a monthly basis, reproducing the same worked-through arguments as the user before. Chicbyaccident (talk) 12:38, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Another way to look at it is maybe with different eyes and the selection of the links and the avoidance of

apostolic mottos[edit]

Hi. First of all, i is not my field, so don't expect any help from me (I add sources of scientific articles) but here is IMHO an article-list who might be useful to have somehow. I was looking for a table of apostolic mottos to see their distributions and evolutions over the centuries and I cannot find it. The concept of apostolic motto is not as important or common as papal name (or even Prophecy of the Popes) for a generic reader, but I feel that such red link should be made an article, or some sort of redirect. What do you think?--Alexmar983 (talk) 05:13, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Maybe we could add a column in the table in Papal coats of arms?--Alexmar983 (talk) 05:15, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Nominating Palais Rohan, Strasbourg for A-Class[edit]

The article failed its FAC, but it was much expanded and edited in the process since it became a GA, and actually got some support: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Palais Rohan, Strasbourg/archive1. It most probably fulfils all the criteria to be promoted A-Class. Thank you in advance to all future reviewers! --Edelseider (talk) 22:03, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Recent changes[edit]

Recently, the Template:Seven deadly sins was expanded and renamed Catholic virtue ethics. The Catholic philosophy template was similarly recently amended to change a section linking to Category:Branches of philosophy to "Virtue Ethics". I have not noticed any discussion regarding either of these changes. While I have no objection to the expansion of the Seven deadly sins template, is "Catholic virtue ethics" the best choice? In addition, the same editor has a current proposal to rename the article "Seven Virtues" to the ubiquitous "Catholic virtue ethic". Anyone interested please feel free to register your views and/or preferences. Mannanan51 (talk) 06:41, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

I've started a conversation on the template talk about the change. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:40, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Roman Catholic vs Catholic - a move request discussion[edit]

Given the earlier discussions about the use of the term "Roman Catholic" and "Catholic", there is a move request relating to this particular issue at Template talk:Roman Catholic Archbishops of Brisbane#Requested move 6 April 2017 on which members of this project may wish to express an opinion, perhaps as part of forming a more general consensus on this issue. Kerry (talk) 07:08, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

WP Catholicism articles proposed for deletion[edit]

Greetings, There are two Diocese of Delaware church articles tagged for deletion.

Asking for help, if anyone can improve these articles. Cheers! JoeHebda • (talk) 12:55, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Help with Stratford Caldecott article please![edit]

Please help me improve my article about the late Stratford Caldecott. His work is of real importance, I believe, to contemporary Catholics, as he is something of a bridge between the church and the culture. His work cites great sources like Aquinas, Pieper, Balthasar, Chesterton...and he is cited by some other contemporary Catholic intellectuals. So he is a kind of hub of real interest, with a love for the church and the world. I am somehow not connecting with the 'use enough references' vibe on wiki, though he has been in the news, cited by many people, profiled on many sites he wrote for. I could really use your help! Here's a link to the draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Stratford_Caldecott CharOster (talk) 16:30, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

RM discussion at Talk:Homosexuality and the Catholic Church[edit]

There is another RM discussion after a move from "Homosexuality and Roman Catholicism" to "Homosexuality and the Catholic Church". I invite you to improve the consensus. --George Ho (talk) 16:43, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

The same goes for Talk:Eastern Orthodox – Roman Catholic theological differences, and Talk:List of Roman Catholic Church artists (the latter failed consensus). Chicbyaccident (talk) 08:15, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Courtesy Notification[edit]

There is currently a discussion at the Fringe Theories Noticeboard concerning the Miracle of the Sun. Interested editors are encouraged to join the discussion. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:42, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages report[edit]

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Catholicism/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

  • The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
  • The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
  • The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Catholicism, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, FYI I added wikilink for "Popular pages" to the WP Catholicism Project page, sidebar and "Subpages" section. JoeHebda • (talk) 04:54, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Protestant denominations - size by default?[edit]

You might want to have a look at this discussion: Talk:List_of_the_largest_Protestant_denominations#Requested_move_24_April_20179. Chicbyaccident (talk) 09:46, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Benedict XVI's infobox[edit]

There's a little dispute at the infobox of Pope Benedict XVI, as to whether or not to use "Bishop of Rome". GoodDay (talk) 15:51, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Do we show a bias against socialism?[edit]

From its omission from our WikiProjects, I would conclude that the Murder of UCA scholars is of no interest to Catholicism. I believe we should consider the following from their WikiPage:

American linguist and political critic Noam Chomsky has contrasted the reception of dissidents in Eastern Europe at that time with that of the slain priests, who remain relatively obscure: "Eastern European dissidents were supported by the US and the Vatican, unlike dissidents elsewhere, who were supported by no one with any power or influence. But that is a great understatement: they [Eastern European dissidents] were given massive support and attention by the entire Western world, quite unprecedented support, vastly greater than the support given to people within Western domains who were suffering far worse oppression and were defending freedom and justice with far greater courage. The disparity is so extraordinary that the very word "dissident" in Western languages refers to East Europeans; no one, except those few who have extricated themselves from the Western propaganda system, even uses the word "dissident" for people like the Central American Jesuit intellectuals who were assassinated in November 1989 by elite forces armed and trained by the US. And while every word of East European dissidents is widely publicized, hailed, and treasured, try to find even a reference to the very important and courageous writings of Fr. Ellacuría and his associates, or other Central American dissidents who had to flee from slaughter or were simply tortured and killed by US-run forces." Jzsj (talk) 12:35, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

I am uncertain why you are taking such a confrontational tone. There is no particular reason that the article is not tagged for the wikiproject. Simply add the tag so that interested project members can find it in the future! –Zfish118talk 21:10, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Titular bishop treatment[edit]

I sometimes think we make more of titular bishop assignments than we should. It's one thing to say Pope X named Person Y titular bishop of Z. But we often include that appointment in two other places: in the Infobox under "Other posts" and in a succession box under "Catholic Church titles". I find both of these questionable. In the first case, a titular bishopric is more title than post, a detail bordering awfully close on trivia. In the second, setting it up in parallel to other titles with a predecessor and/or successor makes more of its significance than appropriate IMHO. The fact that someone is a titular bishop is not open to question, but I wonder about how we handle it, as if it were an assignment with responsibilities rather than, for WP purposes, just a title.

A good recently created example is Angelo De Donatis. Thoughts? Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 20:01, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

I actually agree. Although I think it should be noted somewhere (especially titular bishop vs titular archbishop), the actual title is typically pretty obscure. There are exceptions, for example Marion Francis Forst who was named the first titular bishop of Leavenworth after retiring as Auxiliary Bishop of Kansas City in Kansas. (Leavenworth was the original city for that archdiocese.) --Dcheney (talk) 03:20, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Names of church buildings categories[edit]

There is a discussion on Talk:Catholic Church about our naming conventions for categories about church buildings. Anyone is welcome to join the discussion. TonyBallioni (talk) 12:44, 24 June 2017 (UTC)