 | This template was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
I have added several very old Dioceses that I found articles for. I hope I did this properly, if not fix it or let me know and I will try to fix it. -- W.marsh 19:19, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
- You did a fine job as far as I can see. But including them in this list is comparing apples & oranges, so I'm taking them out.
Doops |
talk 04:57, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- If doing so orphans them, can you think of some other place to create useful links to them? They're kinda just floating out there if this template doesn't link to them, I think. --
W.marsh 05:00, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Well, to be frank they should probably be deleted altogether, since they are essentially duplications of portions of the corresponding CofE bishopric articles. A month ago or so a new editor tried to split those articles up into pre- and post-reformation sections and move them all to unhelpful names; although the CofE bishopric articles got restored to their former names and content, nobody went through and nominated all the pre-reformation forks for deletion. (That all these articles are orphans, incidentally, is a sign of how new to the wikipedia the editors were who started the whole thingummy)
Doops |
talk 05:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Ah okay, thanks for the info... that makes sense. --
W.marsh 05:34, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- PS -- I see from your userpage that you're interested in cleaning-up. If you want to try for deletion in these cases, you may find archived discussions from the incident helpful: Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 7, Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive53. Doops | talk 05:54, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Ah okay, thanks for the info... that makes sense. --
W.marsh 05:34, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Well, to be frank they should probably be deleted altogether, since they are essentially duplications of portions of the corresponding CofE bishopric articles. A month ago or so a new editor tried to split those articles up into pre- and post-reformation sections and move them all to unhelpful names; although the CofE bishopric articles got restored to their former names and content, nobody went through and nominated all the pre-reformation forks for deletion. (That all these articles are orphans, incidentally, is a sign of how new to the wikipedia the editors were who started the whole thingummy)
Doops |
talk 05:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- If doing so orphans them, can you think of some other place to create useful links to them? They're kinda just floating out there if this template doesn't link to them, I think. --
W.marsh 05:00, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
I have to ask, what is the justification for grouping these bishoprics under Great Britain. Politically, there is no such thing as Great Britain, so is there some "Great Britain" concept in the modern Roman church? Calgacus ( ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 15:38, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Would it be possibly to merge this one with the subject's main template? Chicbyaccident (Please notify with {{SUBST: re}} ( Talk) 18:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)