Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Video Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism

Categories for discussion: Former Roman Catholic patriarchates

Maps Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism

RM on Talk:Lawrence of Rome

I have started an RM on Talk:Lawrence of Rome to move the title to Saint Lawrence. All are invited to participate. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:18, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

• Following the RM, the relevant category has been nominated for discussion for potential renaming at: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2017_August_10#Category:Lawrence_of_Rome. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:16, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Body and Blood of Christ

There is a discussion taking place at the above location that members of this Wikiproject might be interested in. All are invited to participate. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:37, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Mass changes to pope articles by new user

Hello all- FYI regarding an editing campaign of unsourced, unexplained changes being made to pope articles by a new user (Special:Contributions/Kimley_Labasan), many of which seem to be repeats or continuations of the activity of an editor at IP 119.93.41.213. I reverted several of the IP editor's changes a couple days ago, but this is out of my area of expertise and interest, so I thought I'd alert others who may want to look into the matter. Eric ^talk 00:22, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks. If I had to guess, they are probably doing it based on (the bane of my wiki-existence) S. Miranda's self-published cardinal/conclave website. Its where half the stuff we have on cardinals pre-1900 comes from, if not more. He's normally good on titles but contradicts some academic published sources on conclave attendance. I generally consider Miranda to be one of the biggest problems we have in our historical papacy articles, but for this info it might be fine. The other possibility is that it's from Catholic-Hierarchy, which is also technically self-published, but has been held by RSN to be a generally reliable source since it is frequently referenced by contemporary official Church websites and the like as reliable. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:56, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

proposed deletion of 2 redirects

See: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 August 31

I've proposed these two redirects for deletion: Consistory of 1644 and Consistory of 1655

No links point to them and I don't think they can be modified to point anyplace useful. I expect that editors who normally comment on deletions will hesitate to weigh in on this specialty topic, so I'm posting this note here in the hope that editors with Catholic cred will contribute. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 14:39, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Categories for discussion: Catholic Church in territories, regions and cities

--Grabado (talk) 09:00, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

New discussions on Catholicism (term)

Several new discussions and proposals were initiated recently on the page Talk:Catholicism (term). Surprisingly, there was no notification here. More participation would be welcomed. Sorabino (talk) 15:41, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

Great Apostasy

Hi. I'd like members to have a look at these edits and the accompanying discussion at Talk:Great Apostasy. It seems to me that they alter the Overview section in a POV way, giving undue weight to fringe Protestant views of the Catholic Church such as idol-worship, worship of Mary, and the hybrid "pagan Mother-Son worship". And not only that, but these fringe views are copied to the lead, totally skewing it. The citations are a collection of far-out Christian websites: http://amazingdiscoveries.org/S-deception_end-time_paganism_Catholic_sun-worship, https://www.sabbathtruth.com/sabbath-history/how-the-sabbath-was-changed, https://www.gotquestions.org/worship-saints-Mary.html, http://www.the-ten-commandments.org/catholic_church_idolatry.html, https://bible.org/question/it-okay-worship-statues-jesus, and a self-published 1914 pamphlet, The Practice of Idolatry, none of which come anywhere near satisfying WP:RS. Any input into the discussion is welcome. I'm copying this to other Christian WikiProjects. Scolaire (talk) 15:19, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

RM at Talk:Alphonsus Maria de' Liguori

Notifying everyone here about the RM at the above page. All are invited to participate. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:21, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

src: upload.wikimedia.org

How to fix the width of "Templates" wikitable, WP Catholicism project page

Greetings, Wondering if someone with wikitable expertise could fix the excess column widths on the project home page? At the "Templates" section. Right now you have to scroll sideways to see the far right column contents. Regards. -- JoeHebda o (talk) 13:24, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Categories for discussion: Catholic universities and colleges by location

--Grabado (talk) 08:13, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Ave Maris Stella

Please note, there are two sidebars on the Ave Maris Stella page. The first is listed as "Roman Catholic Mariology", the second as "Marian prayers". They appear to be identical, and the second doesn't seem to have a great deal to do with Marian prayers. I would have no problem converting the second to something specifically regarding Marian prayers, but would prefer some feedback beforehand. Thank you.Mannanan51 (talk) 05:22, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

this isp

made, at great speed, a whole lot of edits giving all the Popes back to the 2nd century birth and death dates, usually to the day. History simply doesn't have this information, & I don't trust anything he does. I have started rolling them back, from the first edits, & oldest popes, but would be grateful if someone could take over (&maybe check my work). He also adds info re cardinalcies, which I rather doubt exists. People can see where I got to from my contributions just now. Please report progress here. Thanks. Johnbod (talk) 02:17, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

It appears the OP may have derived his information from The Deaths of the Popes by Wendy J. Reardon, (McFarland 2012).[1] Checked thus far, Pope Donus, Pope Agatho, Pope Leo II, Pope Benedict II, Pope John V, and Pope Conon. Mannanan51 (talk) 17:21, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Also, Pope Sergius I, Pope John VI, Pope John VII, Pope Sisinnius, Pope Constantine, and Pope Gregory II. Mannanan51 (talk) 21:50, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! That looks reliable, but I can't see the text for anyone after Peter. But I don't believe for a moment that this edit can be supported by RS. Johnbod (talk) 01:10, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Not quite sure what to make of Reardon's book as she lists "Further reading", but I didn't happen to see any references for any of the entries.Mannanan51 (talk) 02:20, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Have moved the list of pages checked to my Talk page, as it's getting a bit cumbersome here. I do not trust any of the d/o/b entries made by this particular editor. (Please note, User:Kansas Bear has also been cleaning them up.) Mannanan51 (talk) 04:07, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Categories for discussion: Catholic schools

--Grabado (talk) 17:00, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Categories for discussion: Catholic schools (II)

--Grabado (talk) 07:29, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

How do you deal with certain editors?

Such as this IP who kept on adding the hymn to Our Lady of Arantzazu even if it is better suited for inclusion on Wikisource? He later told in his edit summary that those who revert "will not be blessed", but that being said I moved the hymn in question to its proper venue as I don't want to make him/her feel bad anyway. Blake Gripling (talk) 05:26, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Sigh. Yes, unfortunately Catholicism articles are prone to the text of unsourced popular devotions that are likely in the public domain being copied whole cloth into articles. See some of the older versions of the Our Lady of La Salette article that was on the main page yesterday. You deal with it in a few ways: if it is an early Wikipedia article, you can probably simply remove the text with no worries (also applicable to self-published sources that crop up in those articles). If its a recent edition like that IP, you remove it and per WP:ONUS, invite them to take it to talk. If they continue to restore the text, you seek admin intervention. Just be sure not to edit war yourself. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:33, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, for the record my folks do keep images of saints and such, and I wasn't being a total pain to the editor in question at all. All I said was we have sister projects for other, non-encyclopedic texts. Simply taunting a fellow editor just because he did the right thing is just plain mean and sinful imo. Blake Gripling (talk) 05:42, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Project page, list of FA articles

Greetings, The list showed only 43 articles vs. 70 actual FA articles, so I changed the list into a Cat.FA wikilink. With this link there is no need to manually maintain the list of articles. If there are any concerns with this change, let's discuss here. Regards, -- JoeHebda o (talk) 01:55, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Why "Roman Catholic" in the dioceses pages?

The official name of a diocese does not contain the "Roman" part. The 'Roman' part was added during the Reformation as an oxymoron of the universality of the church 'over the entire world' with the specificity of 'only one single see'". Most languages, like Latin or Italian, don't use it. It's really just used in English and it's a relic of the anti-Catholic Protestantism and seems very belittling.

Ex. the Archdiocese of New York is the 'Archdiocese of New York', not the 'Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York'.https://archny.org/Eccekevin (talk) 07:41, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

@Eccekevin: You may wish to direct your inquiry on Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(Catholic_Church) regarding Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Catholic_Church)#Dioceses. Chicbyaccident (talk) 09:45, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

@Eccekevin: The official name of a diocese doesn't even contain the "Catholic" part. I don't know why articles such as Archdiocese of Barcelona are called Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Barcelona when there no need of disambiguation (it is the only christian diocese in Barcelona), against both common usage (WP:COMMONNAME) and its official name. --Grabado (talk) 10:34, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

• It is a case-by-case basis for local dioceses. The Archdiocese of New York unambiguously refers to the Catholic one (it is the most prominent see in the United States. Everyone will know what you are talking about.) The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Foo, however, might be known as that and also might be incorporated as that. Wikipedia does not report the truth, we report what is verifiable to reliable sources. There is no need to right great wrongs on this point. We simply report the most common name that is also the most unambiguous name. Sometimes that includes "Roman Catholic" sometimes it doesn't. TonyBallioni (talk) 11:22, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni:I absolutely agree with you, but the fact is that "Roman Catholic" is nearly always included in titles, ignoring common name. See pages categorised under Category:Roman Catholic dioceses in the United States or Category:Roman Catholic dioceses in Italy as example. --Grabado (talk) 11:49, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Because in the United States it nearly always should be as a country that has historically had a Catholic minority and where many diocese always refer to themselves that way. The Archdiocese of New York is unique in that people will know exactly what you are talking about. Most others that won't be the case. In your change re: Italy, it depends on what the common English name is for these sees, not the common Italian name. TonyBallioni (talk) 11:59, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni:but there is not one case in which there is on "Roman Catholic". For example, in Italy, where all the dioceses are unabigously catholic, whay not at least take the "Roman" part out of it?-- Preceding unsigned comment added by Eccekevin (talk o contribs) 20:20, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Because it doesn't matter what the Italian name is or if there are no other dioceses. The English Wikipedia bases its naming policy on the most common English-language name. We don't have a firm rule on this for diocese (and nor should we). That means we default to the standard practice at RMs, which to examine each diocese on an individual basis. I neither support or oppose renaming Italian dioceses: I'm simply explaining why it might very well be the case that a Catholic diocese in a country where there are no other Christian dioceses might be appropriately referred to as Roman Catholic on Wikipedia. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

• This discussion has almost missed the main point: the term "Roman Catholic" designates only those Catholic dioceses that are of the Latin Rite, since within the Catholic Church there are also numerous parallel Eastern-Catholic dioceses that are designated as "Byzantine Catholic" or "Greek Catholic" or "Melkite Catholic" or "Chaldean Catholic" etc. In many cities, there are parallel seats of Roman Catholic bishops of the Latin Rite and Eastern Catholic bishops of various Eastern-Catholic rites. That is why designation "Roman Catholic" is very useful and should be kept universally in titles of articles on Catholic dioceses of the Latin Rite. Sorabino (talk) 10:08, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

@Sorabino: Eastern dioceses are called eparchies and archeparchies, so using "Roman Catholic" as desambiguation is not necessary. You can see Category:Ukrainian Greek Catholic eparchies, Category:Maronite Catholic eparchies, Category:Armenian Catholic eparchies or Category:Melkite Greek Catholic eparchies. --Grabado (talk) 11:00, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes, but they are also commonly called "dioceses" and "archdioceses", and because of that we have many redirects with that terms, not to mention common use in scholarly and other literature. Sorabino (talk) 11:10, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorabino, yes. I've argued pretty strongly for the Roman=Latin Church disambiguation in the past. That's definitely true for areas with more than one Catholic see (Pittsburgh and Chicago come to mind in the United Stayes). Most diocese, however, won't have that problem, so the COMMONNAME issue is more important. Nice areas with high Eastern Catholic populations the distinction you raise is more important than COMMONNAME in my view. TonyBallioni (talk) 13:25, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

That is true, traditional Eastern Catholic dioceses are mainly situated in the Eastern Europe and in the Middle East, but in recent times the structure of Eastern Catholic Churches has developed globally. Also, there is a question of principle here - the Catholic Church has many rites, so we might ask: why should dioceses of only one rite (in this case Roman rite) be privileged here by omitting the designation of rite in the titles of articles? The term "Roman" in the title of Latin Catholic dioceses is the designation of the Roman rite, the same way as the terms "Byzantine" or "Greek" or "Melkite" etc. are the designations of other particular rites within the Catholic Church. For the sake of consistency and clarity, it would be better to keep the designations of Roman rite in the titles of articles on Catholic dioceses of Roman (Latin) rite. Sorabino (talk) 13:41, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Rites are not part of the name of any diocese, neither Latin dioceses nor Eastern eparchies. So, using COMMONNAME in both cases also provides consistency and clarity. --Grabado (talk) 13:52, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

What do you mean by: "Rites are not part of the name of any diocese, neither Latin dioceses nor Eastern eparchies" ?! Please, look at the official sources of the Catholic Church, every single diocese has a designation of its rite by definition! One of the main reason for that is because for years, specially prior to Vatican II Council, Eastern Catholics were complaining that they have been often treated as "second class" Catholics, and therefore it is the official position of the Catholic Church that all its rites are equal. If we remove "Roman" from the titles of articles of Catholic dioceses of Roman rite, it will reopen the heated discussions about divisions between "pure" (roman rite) Catholics and so-called "second class" Eastern Catholics. The impact of articles in English Wikipedia is huge - if we rename Roman (Latin) Catholic dioceses just as Catholic, it might have very negative effect on social networks. Not to mention some other, very complex issues of ecumenical importance. This is a huge question, and very serious discussion is needed here. Sorabino (talk) 14:08, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+For clarity to non-native English speakers: rite often = sui iuris particular church in speech or writing. This is different than the official definition of a rite, but it is very common in English usage. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:14, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni:: Thanks for the clarification.

@Sorabino: I meant:

• Syro-Malabar Catholic Eparchy of Ujjain -> Eparchy of Ujjain (common name)
• Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York -> Archdiocese of New York (common name)

--Grabado (talk) 15:29, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

• I've discussed why here: WP:Roman Catholic?. This is the naming convention that allows all diocese to be consistent, without the need to disambiguate with non-Catholic diocese with similar names. Further, at least in the United States, most diocese are legally incorporated using "Roman Catholic" in their name. -Zfish118^?talk 18:16, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Please see (preceded by the words... "Welcome to....")

• "The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles." [2],
• "The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York!" [3],
• "The Roman Catholic Church In And Around Liverpool and Region" [4].

This is taken from the webpages of the two largest Archdioceses in the US, and the largest in the UK. It appears to be how they self-identify. Mannanan51 (talk) 20:17, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+The essay WP:Roman Catholic? is an interesting read I had not seen it before and it ties in with what I remember of the issue. The Anglican Church also considers itself part of the catholic church (Nicene Creed and all that), but it does not recognise the Bishop of Rome (the Pope) to be it head. This is described in Roman Catholic (term) --which is a rather American biased article but it touched on this issue. Just because the Roman Catholic Church claims it the one true Christian catholic church, does not mean it has a monopoly on the term catholic. To use the word Catholic without qualifying it with Roman, is to take a [Roman] Catholic point of view. As such missing out "Roman" from "Roman Catholic" means that a number of the bullet points in the naming criteria are not met (particularly if one is looking at sources written by members of, or organisations affiliated to, the [Roman] Catholic Church). While Anglicans will often abbreviate the term to "Catholic" when speaking or writing informally (just as they do with many other terms eg the Queen), my experience is that in a more formal discourse they will use the term "Roman Catholic", while those who are members of the [Roman] Catholic Church will usually use just "Catholic". Here is an example where an interviewer on Vatican Radio asks Rowan Williams (at the time Arch Bishop of Canterbury) "...those outside of the Catholic Church?" Williams's reply includes the phrase "We saw a transparency in the Roman Catholic Church" which illustrates what I mean. -- PBS (talk) 18:58, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

-- PBS (talk) 18:58, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, after 100s of talk pages of discussions throughout the years regarding this issue, of which you have participated in a few before the settled WP:Consensus in 2009, wasn't that a fairly meek attempt of relighting a dispute through the 1A modus operandi arguments? To anyone who has reviewed the extensive background, it should read like the first page of a Proust novel. Chicbyaccident (talk) 20:25, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

I am not sure why you start you statement with "sorry". Consensus can change. -- PBS (talk) 08:25, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Consensus has changed before in some cases, such as whether we should use Latinised names for Greek-speaking historical figures from the Middle Ages, which often rendered the original name unrecognizable and differed from modern academic sources. However, constantly reopening the same discussion may lead to the situation helpfully covered in our essay Wikipedia:Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass. Dimadick (talk) 08:16, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Merge proposal of List of Christian denominations by number of members into List of Christian denominations

For details, please see Talk:List of Christian_denominations#Proposal to let List of Christian denominations by number of members merge with this list. Chicbyaccident (talk) 19:29, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

RfC on naming convention for the Catholic Church

There is currently an RfC at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(Catholic_Church)#RfC:_should_this_page_be_made_a_naming_convention asking if the proposed naming convention for the Catholic Church should be made an official naming convention. All are welcomed to comment. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:31, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Catholicism Portal, News

Greetings, Today I updated Portal:Catholicism/News with news current to July, 2017 information. This is an open invitation for all interested editors to be on the lookout for even "newer news" for posting there. Regards, -- JoeHebda o (talk) 21:33, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Filial correction

The recent article Correctio filialis de haeresibus propagatis (Filial Correction) has been added to several Catholicism related templates. The article is of little notability and poor quality (for instance describing the head of the SSPX as a "Novus Ordo" scholar), and inappropriate for high-level navigation templates. Hodgdon's secret garden is the author. -Zfish118^?talk 18:55, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Catholicism template

I started the article about Bishop Patrick Nair of India. I added a WikiProject Catholicism template to the article. However, an IP editor changed the template to the WikiProject Christianity with WP Catholicism as a subproject. I feel adding the WP Christianity template is redundant and not necessary. The question I have is: should WikiProject Catholicism be a subproject to the WikiProject Christianity or remained separate? Thank you-RFD (talk) 10:59, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

RFD - When WikiProject Catholicism articles need the assessment criteria for upgrading to Class=B the following wikicode is added (example below).

{{WikiProject Catholicism|class=C|importance=Mid | b1 <!--Referencing & citations--> = <yes/no> | b2 <!--Coverage & accuracy --> = <yes/no> | b3 <!--Structure --> = yes | b4 <!--Grammar & style --> = yes | b5 <!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> | b6 <!--Accessibility --> = <yes/no> }}

This can only be done via a separate WP Cath. line and not within WP Christianity talk page line. Regards, -- JoeHebda o (talk) 16:14, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

@142.160.131.202: please see JoeHebda's response. He is the person most active in tagging and assessment for this WikiProject. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:17, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: I am not entirely opposed to having two separate templates. I am opposed to the leaving out {{WikiProject Christianity}} from projects within its scope. I used the combined template at Talk:Patrick Nair in line with RFD's interest in eliminating redundancy. 142.160.131.202 (talk) 16:24, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

I have no opinions on this issue. WikiProject tagging really isn't my thing. I'm just trying to connect the dots between the people who care about the topic. :) TonyBallioni (talk) 16:27, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

@JoeHebda: While that is not relevant to the issue of whether {{WikiProject Christianity}} is included on Talk:Patrick Nair, would that be solved were Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity to adopt Template:WPBannerMeta/class? 142.160.131.202 (talk) 16:24, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Note: a related discussion also exists at Template talk:WikiProject Christianity#WikiProject_Catholicism_template. Thanks, --PaleoNeonate - 16:29, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Might I suggest that this discussion would be better off centralized in one place, i.e., Template talk:WikiProject Christianity § WikiProject Catholicism template? 142.160.131.202 (talk) 16:36, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Naming of papal bio articles. Time to lineup with other monarchial article titles.

Perhaps it's time we agree to rename the articles from Pope Name to just Name, with Name (pope) for those that need disambiguation. Example: change Pope John Paul II to John Paul II & Pope John XXIII to John XXIII (pope). Take note for example, that we have Elizabeth II & not Queen Elizabeth II. GoodDay (talk) 22:25, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm afraid that the problem that would suggest disapproving your proposal is that in comparison with royalties such as Elizabeth, the popes' names are often shared with a more vast amount of other ecclesiastical dignitaries of varying traditions in time and space. Chicbyaccident (talk) 22:48, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

• I see no need to change this. The "Pope X" format clearly and ambiguously identifies the subject as a past or present pope. I am aware of no circumstances that have changed to make this "the time". -Zfish118^?talk 23:41, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

I often edit Pope-related articles (and I have edited or created most Antipope-related categories), though I am not a member of WikiProject Catholicism. In several cases the "Pope" is necessary for disambiguation purposes from other historical figures. Some examples:

• Pope Linus. A 1st-century pope, using a Greek name which appears frequently in Greek mythology. The most notable figure with this name is Linus of Thrace, a legendary musician of disputed historicity and reputed son of Apollo. He is supposedly the creator of the "linos", a type of musical lamentation that resembles the dirge.
• Pope Anacletus. A 1st-century pope whose name is the Greek term (in both ancient and modern Greek) for being "recalled". His name is also rendered as "Cletus" in some sources, and might be a variation of the Greek name Cleitus. The most notable person of this name Cleitus the Black, a military officer under Alexander the Great. Cleitus famously rescued the life of Alexander in a battle, but was later killed by Alexander in a drunken quarrel between them.
• Pope Alexander I. Same name and ordinal with various kings and bishops, including Alexander I of Macedon (one of the combatants in the Greco-Persian Wars), Alexander I of Epirus (primarily known for military campaigns in the Italian Peninsula, and getting killed in the Battle of Pandosia), Pope Alexander I of Alexandria (a 4th-century Christian Patriarch, primarily known as an opponent to Arianism and as one of the leading figures in the First Council of Nicaea), Alexander I of Scotland (a king primarily known for his religious policies, a number of brutal military campaigns, and his inability to father children), Alexander I of Moldavia (a monarch primarily known for his internal reforms, and for switching from a vassal to an invader of Poland), Alexander I of Georgia (the last king of a unified Georgia, as his kingdom was already fragmenting during his reign), Alexander I Jagiellon (a monarch who created a crown union of Lithuania and Poland), Alexander I of Kakheti (a monarch whose diplomatic skills secured the kingdom from external threats, but who ended up murdered by one of his own sons), Alexander I of Russia (one of the combatants in the Napoleonic Wars and the key founder of the Holy Alliance), Alexander I of Bulgaria (the first monarch of modern Bulgaria), Alexander I of Serbia (the first constitutional monarch of Serbia, and primarily known for his assassination), Alexander I of Greece (a monarch with a brief-three year reign during World War I and the Greco-Turkish War), and Alexander I of Yugoslavia (a monarch primarily known for abolishing the constitution, reigning as a dictator, and for his assassination getting filmed and recorded). Most of them have a better claim to fame than the Pope.
• Pope Telesphorus. A pope with a Greek (and pagan) name. Telesphorus was the name of a Greek god or demigod, to whom people prayed for recovery from an illness. There is also a historical general called Telesphorus. The general was a disloyal vassal of Antigonus I Monophthalmus, who briefly attempted to create his own splinter state.
• Pope Hyginus. Same name with Gaius Julius Hyginus (often called just "Hyginus" in sources), a Roman mythologist, astronomer, and professional librarian, whose works are still extant (not all of them). Hyginus the writer is famous as one of our few primary sources on ancient mythology and astronomy.
• Pope Anicetus. A pope with a Greek name. "Anicetus" is a Greek term for someone who has never been defeated, and is typically translated to English as "undefeated", "unconquered", or "invincible". As a personal name, it has been used for various figures, such as a minor Greek war deity (son of Heracles and Hebe), a Roman admiral (served under emperor Nero, primarily known for assassinating the empress Agrippina the Younger on Nero's orders), and an anti-Roman rebel and pirate chief (primarily known for destroying Vespasian's Roman fleet in a successful ambush). There is also a genus of wasps called Anicetus, but it is poorly covered in Wikipedia.
• Pope Soter. A Pope with a Greek name, though a bit peculiar. Soter is a Greek epithet which means "saviour", and typically applied to various Pagan gods, and a number of Hellenistic monarchs who were credited with saving one or more cities from destruction. Christians applied the term "Soter" to Jesus, considering him as their saviour. Soter does not typically appear as a personal name, though the modern Greek name Sotirios is a linguistic derivative.
• Pope Eleutherius. A Pope with a Greek name. "Eleutherius" means "Liberator", and was typically an epithet of the god Dionysus. Christians adopted the name, and we have articles on multiple Saints, bishops, patriarchs, and even a Byzantine Exarch who are all called Eleutherius.
• Pope Victor I. Same name and ordinal with a number of nobles, primarily Victor I, Prince of Anhalt-Bernburg-Schaumburg-Hoym (a German prince from the House of Ascania) and Victor I, Duke of Ratibor (a Prussian noble, politician, and military officer). "Victor I" is also the abbreviation used for the original version of the Victor-class submarine, a class of nuclear-powered submarines of the Soviet Union. Dimadick (talk) 10:22, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

So you're opposed? Johnbod (talk) 16:16, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose Can't see any gain except consistency with other types of article, but there will clearly be newly-introduced inconsistency within the papal bios (see above). Bound to cause lots of work and confusion. Johnbod (talk) 16:16, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose It's not broken. Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:30, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose Note that Elizabeth II is actually an exception to policy, because she is judged to be especially well-known by that title (see WP:NCROY, which specifically names her as a rare exception). Normal naming for monarchs is (Name) (number) of (country), e.g. Elizabeth I of England. There is no good equivalent for Popes (you could invent "Francis of the Holy See", but that would be wildly at odds with common usage) so 'Pope' as a prefix instead seems the best option. TSP (talk) 11:07, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Move Request: Lutheran-Catholic dialogue to Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogue

There is a discussion taking place at Talk:Catholic-Lutheran dialogue#Requested move 22 October 2017 that members of this Wikiproject might be interested in. All are invited to participate. -Zfish118^?talk 13:31, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Source of the article : Wikipedia