Talk:List of Catholic dioceses (structured view): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Military dioceses: Exempt dioceses
Line 70: Line 70:


:Yes, I have for the moment left out all the dioceses that are 'immediately subject to the Holy See', those will be added once the rest are in. As for the military vicariates, they have also been left out not because I don't want to include them, but because I'm not sure where they would fit. Perhaps a special segment "Military Vicariates?" Oh, and thanks for the correction to the Puerto Rico folks. [[User:Benkenobi18|Benkenobi18]] 23:35, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
:Yes, I have for the moment left out all the dioceses that are 'immediately subject to the Holy See', those will be added once the rest are in. As for the military vicariates, they have also been left out not because I don't want to include them, but because I'm not sure where they would fit. Perhaps a special segment "Military Vicariates?" Oh, and thanks for the correction to the Puerto Rico folks. [[User:Benkenobi18|Benkenobi18]] 23:35, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

==Exempt Dioceses==
I notice that the [[exempt diocese|exempt dioceses]], like the military ones, don't seem to have a place in this article yet, probably because they are often not part of a national conference. I'm thinking in particular of the [[Roman Catholic Diocese of Stockholm]] and the [[Archdiocese of Luxembourg]]. Sorry I don't have a more constructive comment, but I'd just like to leave this one as a reminder. [[User:Rwflammang|Rwflammang]] ([[User talk:Rwflammang|talk]]) 13:17, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:17, 4 August 2008

Relationship to Catholic-Hierarchy.org

This page is potentially a violation of the compilation copyright held by Catholic-Hierarchy.org. Argyriou (talk) 00:11, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can't copyright the structure of the Catholic church. He says explicitly that he himself is copying off the latest release from the Vatican, which is public domain.

Benkenobi18 03:19, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree this info is public domain, the source just gives a back up of where the information can also be found online. On another note, great work. ant_ie 08:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The information, in general, is in the public domain. But if we compile and present it in a similar-enough manner to Catholic-Hierarchy.org, we are possibly violating his copyright. If we compile it in a significantly different way, then we are not. The alphabetical list is generally clear, as alphabetizing is not considered a creative effort. (Though if we broke the large letters in exactly the same places, there might be an issue.) By combining Central and North America, Benkenobi18 has made a start towards showing that we are not just copying Catholic-Hierarchy.org or the Annuario Pontificio. As this list develops, we should make other changes to distinguish it from the CH.org list. Argyriou (talk) 16:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't Catholic-Hierarchy's information just derived from the Annuario Pontificio? john k 03:30, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would prefer, though, if we didn't have this material listed as "structured view," which is not intuitive at all, and does seem to be clearly stolen from Catholic-Hierarchy. BTW, much the same information can also be found at Giga-Catholic Information. john k 03:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This page caught my eye for that very reason. I suggest a move to List of Roman Catholic dioceses (by conference)), List of Roman Catholic dioceses (by province)), or if you want to be really explicit about the structure. The intro could also stand to be tweaked considerably. Alai 15:39, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mexican provinces

Looking at the page of the Conferencia del Episcopado Mexicano, I see that the provinces are actually sometimes given names distinct from those of their metropolitan archdiocese. Thus, the province of which the Archbishop of Tijuana is Metropolitan is called Baja California, that for León is called Bajío, that for Tuxtla Gutiérrez Chiapaas, and that for Tulancingo Hidalgo. I'm going to change this, as I assume the official Mexican episcopal conference is a better source than Catholic-Hierarchy. john k 03:59, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes of course. Thanks for taking the time to look these up and change them. I encourage you to propagate any changes you make to these names all the way down the chain, see List of Roman Catholic dioceses in Mexico and the List of Roman Catholic dioceses in North America Benkenobi18 23:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell?

Ben, you don't have the right to revert other people's contributions without comment. On the issue of the Mexican provinces, in particular, I have an actual source for the use of those names (the Conferencia del Episcopado Mexicano). For the rest, you should at least explain why you disagree before reverting massive amounts of material. john k 21:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. I do not disagree with your changes, and in fact they have made the page better. Thank you for your time. What happened is that I was editing the North America Page to change the formatting slightly, and copy pasted from one to the other, because they should match. I hadn't realised you had changed the Mexico numbers.

Benkenobi18 21:29, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, cool. Sorry to snap. john k 23:02, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

THANK YOU I LOVE YOU GUYS

HEY GUYS

THANK YOU SO MUCH!

I LOVE THE WORK YOU DID WITH THIS PAGE!!

THANK YOU AND KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. :)

I APOLOGISE FOR THE ACCIDENTAL OVERWRITING, IT WAS NOT MY INTENT TO REVERT. :)

Benkenobi18 21:30, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like it to be 'Dioceses of North America and not Dioceses of North America and the Caribbean' I am also going to fix some of the Irish links if I may. :)

Benkenobi18 21:33, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course - no problem. Sorry if I reverted any good changes you made without restoring them - I was a bit irked, and figured it'd work itself out. Anyway, sorry about the misunderstanding. john k 23:03, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Descriptions

I was just thinking, this page is already over 40 k, and has maybe a quarter of the total dioceses that need to be done. We are looking at around 200kb for the page in it's entirety.

Do we need the descriptions of the individual dioceses (which are on each diocese page), or should we just have the links to each diocese here so that people can find them? I appreciate the work, just I am wondering on whether we have been a bit too ambitious for this page here.

Benkenobi18 23:11, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think one can be too ambitious.ant_ie 19:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
lol Well if page sizes aren't a concern... ;) Benkenobi18 04:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Will be making a rather large upmerge with the other lists tonight. 6 months has greatly improved it. Benkenobi18 (talk) 07:43, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Popeview is now up and running. Benkenobi18 (talk) 11:43, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military dioceses

In my quick glance, I noticed that the Roman Catholic Archdiocese for the Military Services, USA was not on the list, and neither were other military dioceses and vicarates (unless I missed them). These might be hard to place, as they're not a part of an province, but they're not immediately subject to the Holy See, either. They almost function as personal prelatures within the population of the country. hmmmm. Gentgeen 22:54, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have for the moment left out all the dioceses that are 'immediately subject to the Holy See', those will be added once the rest are in. As for the military vicariates, they have also been left out not because I don't want to include them, but because I'm not sure where they would fit. Perhaps a special segment "Military Vicariates?" Oh, and thanks for the correction to the Puerto Rico folks. Benkenobi18 23:35, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Exempt Dioceses

I notice that the exempt dioceses, like the military ones, don't seem to have a place in this article yet, probably because they are often not part of a national conference. I'm thinking in particular of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Stockholm and the Archdiocese of Luxembourg. Sorry I don't have a more constructive comment, but I'd just like to leave this one as a reminder. Rwflammang (talk) 13:17, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]