The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Support - Hah. You beat me to it. I was just waiting for the Speedy nom to wrap up before proceeding with this one. It's amazing how many people don't seem to get the distinction between a movement and an organization. It's not really that hard... <sigh> Anomalous+0 (talk) 13:04, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Well, these entities may be legally independent, but in so far as they pertain to anything "Catholic", don't they pertain to the Catholic Church (or its history)? Or did I miss anything, such as Independent Catholic entities? For the record, consider where Catholicism redirects in article realm in comparison. PPEMES (talk) 13:25, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. You are probably right and I mistaken. However, could you please point to from where your assertion of category consensuns stems from article realm consensus here (unless you argue it should be the other way around)? PPEMES (talk) 12:23, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Since Catholicism redirects to Catholic Church and I fail to understand your arguments for why there ought to be a a separate taxonomy in the category realm, would you mind referring to where in the article realm your points are stated, to give an idea, please? PPEMES (talk) 23:19, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirects are not the starting point for Wikipedia policy. We can just as easily argue that the needs to be changed there because the Catholicism is broader than the Catholic Church using these categories as an example. tahcchat03:24, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The Church itself is irrelevant to these countries, the part of the population adhering to Catholicism and the pro-Catholic organizations are historically significant. Dimadick (talk) 13:12, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I am not updated on this. Who is described as adhering to Catholicism without pertaining to the Catholic Church? Could anyone make this clear with an article link? PPEMES (talk) 13:53, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sometimes I feel like we're trapped in a loop somewhere... Open any good English dictionary, and you will read that Catholicismis not synonymous withCatholic Church. The first is a faith, the second is a church organisation. The fact that the two concepts are related enough that they are better covered in a single article (hence the redirect) does not mean anything more than just that. Especially, it does not mean that every instance of the word Catholicism in Wikipedia shall be blindly replaced by Catholic Church, in the article namespace, in the category namespace or elsewhere. In the current case, History of Catholicism in the said countries includes periods of time where Catholicism was split between several organisations, such as the Great Western Schism. More recently, the traditionalists akin to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre belong without a doubt to the history of Catholicism, although they were, for a time, outside of the Catholic Church. Not to mention lay organisations such as the Centre Party (Germany) and others mentioned by Marcocapelle. Place Clichy (talk) 11:01, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you mean and I too regret that. Your arguments may be valid. I am open to that. Thanks for being the first user giving examples in this discussion. However, unfortunately, uncertainties remain. Now, I could provide hesitation about your examples, but doesn't it seem like that discussion would be more fit for a talk page in the article realm? Which leads me back again to the core issue: If your arguments are true, why isn't this reflected in the article realm? Wouldn't you too agree that it would give your arguments more credit, if that was the case, against hesitation about deviating WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH in the category tree? Either way, I tried to help you possibly solving this issue with this edit. Feel free to help improve. PPEMES (talk) 12:31, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I know there have been many article renaming requests, some of which I consider unfortunate, in the direction of blindly replacing Catholicism by Catholic Church in titles. Why category renaming requests seem to attract more discussion than article renaming requests, I cannot really explain, although having a central venue for discussion certainly play a part. To help you, I can only quote how several prominent English dictionaries define Catholicism:
Oxford: 1. The faith, practice, and church order of the Roman Catholic Church. 1.1 Adherence to the forms of Christian doctrine and practice which are generally regarded as Catholic rather than Protestant or Eastern Orthodox.
COBUILD Advanced English Dictionary: Catholicism is the traditions, the behaviour, and the set of Christian beliefs that are held by Catholics.
Collins English Dictionary: 1. short for Roman Catholicism 2. the beliefs, practices, etc, of any Catholic Church with sense 1 further defined as the beliefs, practices, and system of government of the Roman Catholic Church
Webster’s New World College Dictionary, 4th Edition: the doctrine, faith, practice, and organization of a Catholic church, esp. of the Roman Catholic Church
Merriam-Webster1 : ROMAN CATHOLICISM 2 : the faith, practice, or system of Catholic Christianity with Roman Catholicism further defined as the faith, doctrine, or polity of the Roman Catholic Church
The terms most frequently cited are the of practice(s), beliefs, faith and doctrine, hardly synonymous with the term Catholic Church which is an organization. Place Clichy (talk) 22:37, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid that it is clear to anyone even remotedly acquanted with this discussion that bursting a few quotes from a selection of English encyclopedias is kind of a 1A) refutable entry into a discussion with exchanged arguments of a length surpassing the Old Testament by now. A discussion part of which has been mirrored fragmentary in various talk pages throughout the years, hence the idea idea to try to centralise it all here: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Catholicism). PPEMES (talk) 13:27, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
If kept, support alternative rename Category:Province of Rome (1870–2014), but I also wonder whether the category should be kept at all. There is hardly anything left. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:57, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt if we will be able to populate that, the article doesn't even provide a list of presidents and article Provinces of Italy does not even bother to describe how the provinces are governed. It does mention though: "Provinces are often deemed useless, and many proposals have been made in recent years to eliminate them." In Italian Wikipedia only 3 presidents of the Province of Rome have an article, of which only 1 also has an article in en.wp. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:33, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Based on the it-wiki the predecessor of the Province of Viterbo belong to the former Province of Rome, thus it was placed in the Italian counterpart. However, the en version did not have a trace of that part of history (the province was founded in 1920s, so Roman era history is not that relevant) Matthew hk (talk) 10:19, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Or to be precise, the starting year 1870 is wrong. File:Circondario di Roma.png, old Province of Rome is as big as Lazio region, while Circondario di Roma (circle of Rome) is more similar to the newer Province of Rome, but not entirely the same. So it may have potential but need to import more content from it-wiki to make it relevant. Matthew hk (talk) 14:07, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you mean, the province of Rome has been greatly reduced in size, in multiple phases in the first half of the 20th century. That makes it even more questionable to keep it as Category:Province of Rome (1870–2014) because it is not clear which province of Rome we are talking about. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:27, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Comment for future reference, self-redirects are eligible for speedy deletion (use the housekeeping parameter since the tool doesn't recognize category redirects. buidhe (formerly Catrìona) 03:32, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
