Talk:Ecclesiastical provinces and dioceses of the Episcopal Church

message: The reason I put the map center|500px is because it's relatively central to the article.  Other choices would have been reasonable; but thumb|right|400px rarely is, and definitely not here.  This is what it looks like on a non-maximised window when you do that.  The problems with it are:
#By floating it right you have it competing with the table of contents, which is especially a problem if 
#You set the size too wide for a floated element anyway, and
#You shouldn't be specifying the size of a "thumbnail", usually, since people set that in their own preferences (though admittedly I've been guilty of this last one from time to time).
Basically, we need to either decide that this image is central to the article—in which case it should be "center" and some large number of pixels like 400 or 500, or else that it is a sidebar, in which case make it a thumbnail and let its size run to the user's preference./blahedo (t) 02:57, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Province map size and placement 

message: The spelling 'Litoral' is correct according to Church documents. I believe it's Spanish instead of English. -- BPMullins | Talk 15:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Litoral Ecuador 

message: :Image:Province2-Logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Province2-Logo.jpg

message: :Image:Province3-Logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:03, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Province3-Logo.gif

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Ecclesiastical provinces and dioceses of the Episcopal Church. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071012205719/http://www.cathedralsofcalifornia.com:80/ to http://www.cathedralsofcalifornia.com
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:51, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: We should consider merging the 'Former provinces and dioceses' section with the section on 'Dioceses no longer in existence' and 'Formerly missionary districts'. These sections contain a lot of misstatement and there are a lot of gaps when you compare the three lists.
May I suggest a single category called 'Former diocese and missionary districts' which contains a table or a bullet point list, perhaps organised by date of founding.
I also noticed that the use of parentheses to indicate a non-obvious see city is a bit pointless. I would remove this and instead have a small note next to the cities that do not possess a cathedral (e.g. The Dalles (no cathedral)). What do you think? I am unlikely to follow this up so if you agree, go ahead and do it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vast galaxy (talk • contribs) 10:17, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging Former Dioceses Sections