Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism/Archive 2

message: I'm planning to create a template for RC Cathedral stubs, as it doesn't seem very fitting to give them church stubs. Ideas? I'll need a thumbnail too.. Ariedartin JECJY 17:13, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Look forward to using it. -Murcielago 13:57, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It has been done. I used the image in the Ulm Münster article. See it at Template:RC-cathedral-stub. Sorry Murcielago, but the Saint Francis Cathedral in Santa Fe is a bit small for a thumbnail. Ariedartin JECJY 15:55, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: no hard feelings.Will start using the template! Murcielago 06:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening template for Cathedral Stubs 

message: I just had an idea about converting articles from the Catholic Encyclopedia. I noticed an editor had simply dumped the text straight out of the C.E. without formatting it, without wikifying, without updating the language, without removing the POV, etc (against the Wikipedia:Catholic Encyclopedia topics guidelines). And I realized that doing all that for the one article is a pretty extensive task for one editor, and having a number of editors help out could always be beneficial. On the other hand, I think having an unfinnished conversion in the main article namespace is in poor form. So I thought, why not make a subpage of this project devoted to a 'holding cell' for converting text. Maybe we could get a queue of articles going, and have a group of editors work on the conversion one at a time. Once the article is up to speed, we then can add it to the main namespace and move on to the next article to be converted in the queue. Would this work? Or are there not enough editors around to devote time to such an endeavour? Or are there any other/better ideas?--Andrew c 02:03, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good idea.JASpencer 09:49, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I like this idea.I did one once and it was so big it had to be split into two articles Animals in the Bible and List of animals in the Bible.It was a lot of work.Perhaps we could nominate and vote on topics, just as we do for the CCE, but rather than have a set time limit we would move them along as soon as they are completed. --Briancua 12:57, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I'm currently trying to list all the red links by subject - it's on the Wikipedia:Catholic Encyclopedia topics main page.We should perhaps focus on the more churchy topics.However I could use some help on sub-categorising the topics, I'm going through Wikipedia:Catholic Encyclopedia cat People at the moment. JASpencer 18:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catholic Encyclopedia conversion 

message: I put up the Knights of Columbus up for the Collaboration Effort while I was trying to bring it up to featured article status.Its already made FA status so I would like to remove it.There are other Catholic articles that need the work more.Would anyone object to my removing it from the queue? --Briancua 00:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine with me.I say put your suggestion on the Collaboration talk page, and if no one objects by Friday, to take it off the queue. MamaGeek (Talk/Contrib) 11:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal From Queue

message: There has been a proposal to merge Catholic in to Catholicism. It is being discussed at Talk:Catholicism#Merge of Catholic in to Catholicism. It has unanimous support at present. Any input is welcome. --WikiCats 08:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge of [[Catholic]] in to [[Catholicism]]

message: Some of you may be interested in the following, posted a few days ago to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Anglicanism. Note that the category renames are processed at Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_July_11 rather than the category talk pages. Gimmetrow 16:54, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As always, thank you for keeping a cool head and assuming good faith! </snark>I explain below the reason for the confusion - but kudos for an interesting interpretation of my motives.In fact, no one is winning the argument.It's a stalemate, because no one is changing his or her mind. Fishhead64 07:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The CfD link is right up there in the part I posted. The indented part is from Fishhead's post to WPP Anglicanism. Gimmetrow 05:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Catholicism" and "Roman Catholic" 

message: I was intending to start an article on Archbishop Baillargeon. I found that there already was one but that it was a redirect page to the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Quebec. Is there a reason why I shouldn't remove the redirect and put the article there? I don't want to thwart some greater plan. (also, this may not be the spot to ask the question). If anyone has an opinion, I will hold off for a couple days. Cheers and thanks in advance. Stormbay 20:15, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think there's any reason why you couldn't start an article. The redirect probably just exists because no one had enough information to actually write one. —Mira 02:43, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Charles-François Baillargeon]] 

message: Fishhead, has added yet another article to be removed to another "Roman" title.This move and all others that do not recognize the name of the Catholic Church are clear violations of WP conventions and policies.Please help put a stop to this disgrace.Every other institution on WP get to name itself, except for the Catholic Church.This is clearly anti-Catholic bias.
Please see Talk:Catholic devotions] for the vote. For a review of this issues based on WP policy, see CC vs. RCC
Vaquero100 19:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand that you feel very strongly about this, but I can't help but feel that notes such as this, while a good thing to have, should be worded as neutrally as possible. —Mira 01:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Latest Assault on the Name of the Catholic Church

message: I presume that in your missionaries section, editors will be looking to link and otherwise improve the articles on the eight people involved above. While doing so, someone may be able to clarify Jean de Lalande. At various sources he is listed as a layman assisting the Jesuits while at others he is referred to as a Jesuit priest. If it matters, it would be nice to find a definitive reference and edit the article as appropriate. I was unable to find a reference that swung me one way or the other. Thanks! Stormbay 17:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Canadian Martyrs]] 

message: Template: has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. —Mira 23:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of Template:{{ucfirst:Project Catholicism 101 }} 

message: Papal conclave is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy 01:34, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Papal conclave

message: I have noted that several of the pages on particular diocese/archdiocese list all of the bishops who have administered that diocese.I am also aware that there is a history of individual bishops who think that the work might be too much for them to request and often received auxiliary bishops.It occurs to me that it is possible that the most significant events oin the life of an individual bishop's life might have been in the time he was serving as an auxiliary bishop (if he did so).Having said that, no specific instances like that come to mind.Do the rest of you think it would make sense to list all the auxiliary bishops who have served a diocese as well as the regular bishops?If so, how? They could either be listed separately (say in a listing below the main list) or listed with, perhaps, two bullets instead of one, making it clear that they function under the main bishop.I would welcome any responses.Badbilltucker 13:08, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Auxiliary bishops 

message: I question whether this article is encyclopedic enough to stand on its own, or if pieces of it should be merged into the individual articles. See WP:ORG for details.--SarekOfVulcan 01:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[The Catholic University of America and The Knights of Columbus]] 

message: Apart from the controversy over naming WP pages and projects with "Roman" or not, I feel like it might make an interesting article to document what names have been used by whom with what intent for the Catholic Church through history. Though polemical in tone, Vaquero has put together a lot of information and arguments here. -- Meyer 09:37, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Church's Name 

message: Two categories relating to this project are currently being considered for renaming:
A rename of :Category:WikiProject Catholicism 101 to :Category:WikiProject Catholicism in order to match the recent change of the project's name has been proposed here.
A rename of :Category:WikiProject Catholicism members to :Category:WikiProject Catholicism participants has been proposed here. 
Please join in the discussions. —Mira 02:12, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Two CFDs

message: === Bible study ===
I welcome and encourage contributors to this project to help expand Bible study (Christian). This article suffers from a lack of relevent view points, and a lack of information in general. Any help would be appreicated. Good luck, and thanks!--Andrew c 14:01, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd note that there is some discussion going on at Wikipedia:Citing sources/Bible which may be relevant, and also that determining which translation to link to has been one of the larger controversies, as I recall. —Mira 21:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bible 

message: I welcome and encourage contributors to this project to help expand Bible study (Christian). This article suffers from a lack of relevent view points, and a lack of information in general. Any help would be appreicated. Good luck, and thanks!--Andrew c 14:01, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bible study 

message: It'd be a good idea to write, for each translation of the Bible, if it's in British or American English, and to provide a link to a page giving the list of countries whose bishops conference have approved the use of that version in liturgy, if any.
Does anyone know which version is approved for use in liturgy in the U.K., Ireland, English speaking Africa?
--Henri de Solages 05:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bible versions 

message: As you may know, there is a template for refrencing Biblica quotes.The idea is that one simply clicks on a passage, when used as a refrence, and is taken there.For example: .Sometimes the link goes to a huge list of Bibles, for example: .
*First, I would like to know how to link to a particular Bible - is there a list of the abbreviations for the various translations?
*Second, there is a great lack of conformity in the use od this feature.Sometimes no link is given, sometimes the link goes to the list, and sometimes to the passage.Should we go through all the catholic pages and impose a uniform policy here?Personally, I find it annoying to be linked to a huge list.
*Third, if we do, and we link all passages to a certain translation, should all the catholic articles use the same translation, for uniformity (maybe Douai-Rheims)?
*Fourth, is it just me, or is the website with the quotations rather ugly, both in color and script?
Lostcaesar 20:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd note that there is some discussion going on at Wikipedia:Citing sources/Bible which may be relevant, and also that determining which translation to link to has been one of the larger controversies, as I recall. —Mira 21:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of Biblical Quote Template 

message: Hello! We at the Work via WikiProjects team for Wikipedia 1.0 would like you to identify the "key articles" from your project that should be included in a small CD release due to their importance, regardless of quality. We will use that information to assess which articles should be nominated for Version 0.5 and later versions.Hopefully it will help you identify which articles are the most important for the project to work on. As well, please add to the Catholicism WikiProject article table any articles of high quality. If you are interested in developing a worklist such as this one for your WikiProject, or having a bot generate a worklist automatically for you, please contact us.Please feel free to post your suggestions right here.Thanks! Walkerma 06:11, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for submitting a list.Sorry I'd missed the fact that you are already using the bot, it was getting very late! Cheers, Walkerma 04:34, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Key articles for Wikipedia 1.0 

message: The page, Roman Catholic Bishop of Montreal, may be of some interest to the project. It may be a candidate for expansion, merging, or whatever. I'm sure you are aware of it but, if not, this is a "heads up". Cheers! Stormbay
* Two new stub articles, Édouard-Charles Fabre and Jean-Jacques Lartigue need lots of TLC if that fits someones interests here. Regards! Stormbay 18:51, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A page for Attention? 

message: It would do a lot of good for this page's criticisms to be distributed throughout the article rather than concentrated in one section. This, I think, is the Wikipedia guideline. There also seems to be undue weight as the section of the criticism is the longest. I don't think the critisms against her is the most important part of the article.--Nino Gonzales 02:53, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Mother Theresa]] POV

message: There's an ongoing discussion right now on Talk:Beaver about the distinction that the Roman Catholic Church draws between meat and nonmeat for the purposes of the Ash Wednesday/Good Friday/Fridays during Lent prohibition.It seems that there is some authority (based on a passage in St. Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologica) that animals that are regarded as principally aquatic (including fish, and presumably including beavers) are treated as nonmeat for this purpose, and it seems that there is some authority (see citations in the Beaver article and additional references in Talk:Beaver) that the Church continues to adhere to this distinction.The notion that "the Church thinks that beavers are fish" seems too silly to some.Come check out the discussion at Talk:Beaver.Spikebrennan 18:00, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catholic Church distinction between meat and nonmeat

message: This article may interest someone. it needs work and is uncated at the moment. Stormbay
:I've added a category, but I don't really know enough about the topic to feel wholly comfortable editing it. —Mira 03:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I have been referring articles here that I spot that probably have some significance for the project. Is this the best spot? Stormbay 18:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that it is. —Mira 18:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Chaplet of Divine Mercy]] 

message: A lot of the pope images that we use are fair use, and the rationale isn't that great for the images. It would be great if we didn't have to worry about this - if someone who speaks better Italian than me could contact these people (http://www.vatican.va/news_services/or/photo/ph_index_ita.html) and get official permission to use their images under the GFDL. Does anyone feel up to this challenge ? Megapixie 05:22, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, my Italian is nonexistent -- I'm a danger to myself in a restaurant.The Vatican has always been insistent on intellectual property protection for its materials (people just didn't notice until recently).I think that the GFDL will not be acceptable to them, as it does not allow for restrictions on commercial use or modifications, which I am rather sure that they do want to restrict.Perhaps a Creative Commons license along the lines of atribution/noncommercial/no-derivatives might be acceptable, with some careful work.CC licenses have been accepted as legal and enforcable in the EU in at least one court case.But it will take some discussion with them, and therefore, it's fair use up until then. --ClaudeMuncey 15:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contacting the Vatican News Service- to ask them to release their images as GFDL 

message: I saw this show up in RCP and wonder if it should be cleaned up and kept. Can someone take a look at it and see if it's a notable group worth keeping? Looks like a traditionalist, pro-tridentine, somewhat sedevacantist group not currently in good standing with the church. Article badly needs cleanup: POV, apparently written by a member. Per the article, also goes by Society of St Pius the X. Fan-1967 13:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Latin Mass Society of Australia]] 

message: Jean-Pierre Aulneau was Jesuit missionary and martyr who may be of interest to this project. (I have posted a few of these type of notices here. If they are annoying; tell me to stop. If they are being read and will potentially be useful, please let me know. Thanks and "happy editing!"
Stormbay 19:15, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One thing you should probably do with these articles is place Template:Project Catholicism on the talk page. That should alert people to the existance of the articles. —Mira 20:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the advice. It is easy to alert someone when one comes across something. I just want to make sure someone who might edit the article further is actually reading the page where I am posting. Jean-Pierre Aulneau, for example, is not in the Wikipedia:Catholic Encyclopedia cat Missionaries listing. Should he be? and that sort of thing..thanks again! Stormbay 21:32, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know much about the Wikipedia:Catholic Encyclopedia topics project, but my understanding is that it is a list of articles that need to be created, not articles that already have been created. —Mira 01:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jean-Pierre Aulneau 

message: User Danras is wreaking havoc on this article, particularly the Roman Catholic section.Could someone look at this?I'm not much of a wikipedian myself, but this has been bothering me greatly.His comments on the talk page betray his intentions.--Antelucan 02:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A RfC was made to resolve a revert war involving Danras against Lima and myself.The section in question should fall under the scope of this project, and I would appreciate your input (additionally, please consider the in-need-of-attention Salvation in Catholicism article).--Antelucan 15:57, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Salvation]] 

message: This title was listed in the to-do list. It seems, however, to be a rather strange way to identify the given era. It suggests, falsely, that either Vatican II ended in 1978 or its implementation did.Dcheney 04:09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pope Paul VI, the Pope who ratified Vatican II, died in 1978.Maybe Popes John Paul I and II are considered the start of the post-Vatican II era. -- Cat Whisperer 02:09, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vatican II era in the Catholic Church (1961-1978) 

message: I've come across large numbers of almost content-free stubs on English RC parishes (or perhaps parish churches -- it's not entirely clear which.I've made two rather overlapping lists according to how they're stub-tagged, here, and here.Could someone have a look at these articles and tidy them up somehow:perhaps by expanding them somewhat to have some meaningful content, redirecting them to a "list of" article, or at the least, stub-tagging them more consistently.I'm also going to leave a note at the UK Wikipedians' notice board.Alai 22:36, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  English parish nano-stubs 

message: One of the things we could consider doing is making a list of B Grade article that could be nominated for Good Article status.There must be quite a few articles in this category.
JASpencer 22:11, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good Article Status 

message: Hi, I'd like to ask some editors from this project to evaluate Joan of Arc and its talk page, particularly the Visions section.This FA has come under criticism from a particular editor who thinks it is religiously biased.In the interest of fairness I'm seeking input from both Catholics and atheists.No specific expertise about Joan of Arc is necessary - just seeking fresh eyes and general impressions.Please leave reactions on the article talk page.Thank you. Durova 02:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Joan of Arc]] 

message: Hello. Has there been any concerted effort or plan to improve the many cathedral article stubs?CF18000 09:03, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: IMHO an article on the diocese should come first, in which the cathedral can be mentioned as one of the sections - see e.g. my article Diocese of Surat Thani. I don't think all the cathedrals are notable enough to have a separate article, especially in those countries which have very few catholics the cathedral is often just a normal church which happen to be the largest or most central one of the diocese. andy 12:11, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cathedral Stubs 

message: You might consider a Category:Roman Catholic bishops of Canada since the more general cats. are large. Thanks! Stormbay 02:50, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: James Louis O'Donel, (1737-1811), the first Roman Catholic bishop of St. John's, Newfoundland has his own article if someone wants to link him somewhere. Stormbay 21:11, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roman Catholic bishops of Canada 

message: I've initiated a minor FAR for Papal Tiara. I hope that someone from this WikiProject can address the concerns I've raised there. savidan(talk) (e@) 19:48, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Papal Tiara FAR 

message: I was wondering if I could get some advice regarding a proposal I have made at Talk:List of Roman Catholic dioceses to in some way standardise the naming of articles on dioceses and archdioceses. Thylacoleo 05:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Advice for naming standard for articles on dioceses and archdioceses