Talk:Lists of office-holders

message: Is there a better word than "incumbent"? It doesn't mean anything in the UK... :-/ by office? Martin
:Ok with me. - User:Docu
----
Hmm...Irish offices are a problem here.  Could we change the Ireland, Republic of entry to just Ireland, so that we could include lists of Lord-Lieutenants and Chief Secretaries during the British period, as well as Governors-General of the Irish Free State, and so forth?  What do others think? john 02:55, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Name of the list

message: At present, it seems that Armenia, Georgia (country), and Azerbaijan don't appear on the list. Under what regional grouping should they be included? Europe? Asia? Both? Personally, I'd prefer placing them under both, even though it means repetition - I've seen them labeled both "European" or "Asian" often enough that we can't really predict which people will look for them under. But is there a policy on the matter somewhere? --Vardion 07:15, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Armenia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan

message: Should this page be renamed? Is the title a proper usage of the word incumbent? We could instead name it lists of office-holders or perhaps lists of leaders.  - SimonP 00:59, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)
:see Talk:Lists of incumbents#Name of the list above. -- User:Docu
I like lists of officeholders, personally. john 06:45, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: How about Lists of people by office held ? -- User:Docu
Why have the title longer than necessary?  Lists of office-holders accomplishes the same thing and is shorter. john 17:36, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

text: It would match Lists of people, but it's probably better to keep it shorter .. let's rename to Lists of office-holders. -- User:Docu
I suggest a wait of 24 hours to see if anyone objects, and then we do it.  john 18:05, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

text: Why the hyphen? Looks a little odd. "office holder" or "officeholder" seems more familiar. Stan 05:14, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Renaming the Page (again)

message: May I propose that the various bishop lists listed here be moved to their own page?  Over all, it might be useful to make this page more of a clearinghouse, and put many of the lists of lists on their own pages.  Any thoughts? john k 04:28, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We do have List of Bishops and Archbishops, where I think they are all listed - some of them are kind of randomly listed here too. Lately I have been wondering if we should try to split up the page by time period, if that is feasible, but it would definitely be easier to move the religious office-holders elsewhere. Adam Bishop 05:04, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the heading "List of office holders" (or "... incumbents as it was previously) was always going to be very broadly-based.  Where does it end? - "lists of head of biology at Little Wolding-in-the-Marsh secondary school".  I think that there should be  separate pages for lists of religious leaders, national leaders (possibly separate pages for extinct states and extant states), leaders of international organisations and municipal leaders, but with an umbrella index page. --JohnArmagh 15:53, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this might be sensible.  In the meantime, I'd suggest that only lists of Patriarchs and higher should be here... john k 21:41, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Good move of bishops.  If there were more knights we might have to move them, so as not to put the kings in checkmate --JohnArmagh 05:32, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal: Bishops 

message: Why is an article titles Heads of Government of Slobovia rather than heads of government of Slobovia?  One writes "The Pope has decreed that..." with a capital "P" or "The last three popes have decreed that..." with a lower-case "p".  When "Head of Government" is the official title, one could treat it just like "pope" in this example.  But it's seldom the official title.  I just moved heads of Government of Ethiopia to heads of government of Ethiopia, thinking the former title was clearly incorrect, and then when I clicked on "what links here" so that I could fix the (very few) links, I find the Augean stable that is this page. Michael Hardy 02:02, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have seen you taking the lead on this and, without it being top of my agenda, I have been following your example.  No-one as yet appears to be up-in-arms about it.  Historically where "Head of Goverment" etc. has been the official title it has tended to be only one of a number of titles used by incumbents who rightly belong in the one listing. --JohnArmagh 05:40, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Capital letters -- maybe an Augean stable in this case?

message: Re this para: "These are lists of incumbents, i.e. lists of people in various offices and positions, including heads of states or of subnational entities. A historical discipline, archontology, focuses on the study of past and current incumbents."
This bothers me (and I know the issue has been raised previously).  The word "incumbent" means the current holder of an office, and using it any other way is a degradation of our language.  "Current incumbent" is a tautology, and "past incumbent" is an oxymoron.  It is not correct to say that Bill Clinton is a past incumbent of the office of POTUS.  There is only ever one incumbent - the person currently holding the office.  All other people who were incumbents are previous office-holders.  JackofOz 22:10, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Incumbent

message: Is it me or does it lakes a East Timor incunbents article? (I know, not a lot to say, but some things at least...it is the single country ignored in this!)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.196.17.137 (talk) 22:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  East Timor 

message: List of office-holders (singular) redirects here. I think it should redirect to List of current heads of state and government instead. --Hamsterlopithecus 07:53, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of office-holders 

message: Why are the links in the external links on this page? They are personal webpages of an individual who documents this. Wikipedia is not an advertisement those sites?
According to wikipedia guidelines just because there are no links, it not given that there should be links. An article of this nature doesn't need external links. Lihaas (talk) 23:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  external links 

message: A discussion has been started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries/Lists of countries which could affect the inclusion criteria and title of this and other lists of countries.  Editors are invited to participate. Pfainuk talk 13:42, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: New Discussion

message: The inclusion of the Archbishops of Canterbury and the exclusion of the Ecumenical Patriarchs of Eastern Orthodox church reflects a seriously British bias! Similarly the absence of the Methodists is questionable, though I guess you can argue that they only hold office for a year, unlike the other denominational heads listed.
Great resource however...! Ender's Shadow Snr (talk) 21:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Denominations 

message: Right now the header of the List contains a reference to "2007 in politics" for "recent changes". I could change that in a moment, but I wanted to ask if there is a method to mark this article for an automatic update each January when a new year has arrived? Or is there a portal for political news that can refer to instead without using the "recent changes" angle to it?
Additionally when skimming over this talk page something occured to me... Is there really a point in keeping a "list of lists"? Isn't that the purpose for CATEGORIES??? --5.146.47.75 (talk) 03:15, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Keeping it recent?