Talk:Meletius Metaxakis

message: The Greek Freemasons claim that Meletius was a member. Contains the name of the Patriarch in question Meletios Metaxakis, "Alexandrian and Ecumenical Patriarch," listed on its website. which seems to be forbidden by the Orthodox Church. Can we find better sources for or against this claim? Daask (talk) 17:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Freemason? 

message: None of the other Wikipedias refer to him as "Meletius III, IV and II Metaxakis". They either call him Meletius Metaxakis or Meletius IV. The phrasing is cumbersome, and he was never known by this combined title during his lifetime, nor is he referred to this way in any of our sources.Jpbrenna (talk) 13:24, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Move 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: moved.   Mdewman6 (talk) 21:04, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Meletius III, IV and II Metaxakis →  – Wikipedias in other langauges title the article Meletius Metaxakis or Meletius IV from his time as Ecumenical Patriarch, which is equal but primus inter pares to the other orthodox sees, including the other ones that he occupied. The sources either refer to him this way, or they refer to him by the full title when discussing his tenure in each of the sees that he occupied. None of them refer to him by this combined regnal number system, leaving out the names of the sees occupied, while adding in his secular name. This seems to be a creation of the user who moved the page, and while his other edits were helpful, this one is not. Unfortunately, I am not able to revert this without destroying the good edits, and I was unable to move the page to the shortest and most neutral descriptor, because it already exists, with multiple redirects here. Jpbrenna (talk) 14:25, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 24 August 2021 

message: I have just removed an unsourced assertion about Masonic membership, and editorial comments about him being "infamous" from the lede. It has been alleged by opponents of Meletius that he was a Mason, and apparently a Masonic lodge in Greece claims that he was a member. The Orthodox Church does not approve of Masonry. From this point of view, an Orthodox Christian will not approve of the alleged Masonic membership, especially by an Orthodox hierarch: it is infamous as far as he is concerned; however, it is not infamous as far as a Mason is concerned (assuming it is true -- if it is not, the Mason may very well consider it infamous that someon was not a member of his organization). Because Wikipedia is supposed to be NPOV, we cannot state  declarations of infamy, even if we strongly feel that way. If you have a quote where someone else has called Meletius infamous, then by all means quote that -- but I still don't think we ourselves as editors should be making that declaration in the lede: we should be summarising what appears below, and noting that he is "controversial", a more neutral descriptor. Meletius was removed from one of his early posts and evicted from the Holy Land, and he was later deposed from two of his autocephalous sees. He sought and achieved calendrical reforms that are not accepted by a significant number of Orthodox to this very day, including many of the laity and monastics under the joint administration of his old see. All of this is highly relevant and should be in the article. I strongly support re-inserting sourced material about the alleged Masonic membership allegations and other controversies. But we must use neutral descriptors when discussing it here, and refrain from offering personal opinions about it. My plan was to finish translating th Greek material first with its cited sources, and then look for additional sources to expand the English version, including different points of view. If someone has something to add now, I would not be opposed. But the way that this material was inserted was unsourced and not NPOV. --Jpbrenna (talk) 16:08, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversies, including alleged Masonic membership