Talk:Bishop of London

message: I have merged the article "Bishop of London (Catholic)" into this one.  aliceinlampyland 21:52, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: This article seems to lack neutral point of view and, in particular, it repeatedly emphasises the split between Anglicanism and Roman Catholicism which is, in parts, anachronistic and, pretty much everywhere, irrelevant, in that it is not a feature of this see any more than of any historic English see.  Chelseaboy 16:42, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Have tried to fix this now.  Chelseaboy 16:51, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

text: All the pre-Reformation English bishoprics were modified by someone a few months back to split them into Catholic and Anglican articles; some echoes of this are probably still kicking around. Here's the pre-move version, if it helps. Shimgray | talk | 16:54, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Balance 

message: I had always thought the Bishop of Durham was the senior bishop after the two archbishops, given that the role of Prince Bishop is viewed as a higher status, whereas this article seems to state it is the Bishop of London. Can someone clarify please? user:lawsonrob
: I thought that too, but it seems the correct order of precedence is the Bishops of London, Durham and Winchester, followed by Diocesan Bishops (in order of seniority), and then Suffragan Bishops. See  – Agendum 23:46, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hierarchy of Bishops

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bishop of London. 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/20130513125933/http://www.archaeologyuk.org/ba/ba5/BA5NEWS.HTML to http://www.archaeologyuk.org/ba/ba5/BA5NEWS.HTML
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:25, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bishop of London. 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/20120607020502/http://www.churchofengland.org/media/40670/chapter4.pdf to http://www.churchofengland.org/media/40670/chapter4.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:15, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Excellent article on Richard de Belmeis I goes into spelling his name, but he and his nephew appear as de Beaumis in the table on this page. I think they probably should be streamlined into de Belmeis, which is the name normally used by historians.  I can't see how to do this with the right links, though... Katiehawks (talk) 10:05, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beaumis or Belmeis?