Jump to content

Talk:Catholic Church

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleCatholic Church has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 7, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
January 17, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
January 29, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
January 30, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
February 7, 2008Good article nomineeListed
February 15, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
March 18, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
April 8, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
June 1, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
June 13, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 19, 2008Good article reassessmentKept
October 4, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
November 8, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
April 20, 2010Good article reassessmentDelisted
May 31, 2011Peer reviewReviewed
March 16, 2015Peer reviewNot reviewed
April 4, 2015Good article nomineeListed
March 1, 2024Good article reassessmentKept
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 27, 2007.
Current status: Good article

GA Reassessment

[edit]

Catholic Church

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review
Result: No consensus. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:27, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Several uncited sections, including almost the entire first section of the History section. History focuses disproportionately on 20th and 21st century. Z1720 (talk) 17:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree that the history weighting is a significant problem. Might require a minor rebalancing—-I’m not sure why John Paul II has his own section while other popes do not (aside from Francis, but the case for having a section on the current pope is strong)—-but that’s a modest edit, not a reason to delist. The several uncited paragraphs in the History section (which look to be the only significantly uncited section to me) do need fixed, but I note that History of the Catholic Church has a pretty well-cited early history section, so that shouldn’t be a hard fix. Reassessment seems a pretty big overreaction for these problems—-it’s pretty firmly WP:JUSTDOIT territory. El Sandifer (talk) 20:25, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep on grounds offered. The first part of the History section appears to be a lede-style summary of the subsections afterward (a la WP:LEADCITE), with the relevant citations in the respective subsections. If truly desired, go and move the relevant citations back up, but this is a style that isn't unreasonable. As for focus - the Catholic Church is a topic where multi-volume books have been written on it, there is no one perfect amount to cover on each time period. I will say that random readers are probably more interested in the recent history aspect, so it wouldn't shock me if the 2424 article on the Catholic Church disproportionately focuses on the 24th century. SnowFire (talk) 21:56, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist 1) if the unsourced content in the history section is a sourced elsewhere in the article, it is redundant and needs to be removed per GACR#3b 2) obvious recentism in the history section. The Catholic Church has a really long history so the twentieth and twenty first centuries need to be covered in similar amount of detail as other historical epochs, and summary style needs to be used. Note that I did not look at the rest of the article (t · c) buidhe 17:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There is no obvious "recentism" in the history section. The 20th century section does not appear disproportionately long compared to the rest of the section. I also see no uncited sections. Note that my comments pertain to this most recent revision. –Zfish118⋉talk 18:58, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that Zfish118's comment follows my examination and removal of the offending parts. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 03:04, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent work in trimming the history section! –Zfish118⋉talk 03:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Section on Joseph

[edit]

A section on Joseph was recently added under the Virgin Mary section. I think this is wp:undue. He is clearly not one of the most important saints. Doctrine about him seems like an afterthought (and not dogmatic). I would revert myself but I cann't yet. Rolluik (talk) 11:52, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Penance

[edit]

First I would say that it should list its multiple common names, reconciliation and confession which are more common then penance. Second the section states "Serious sins (mortal sins) should be confessed at least once a year and always before receiving Holy Communion, while confession of venial sins also is recommended." The Catholic Church requires catholics to go to confession at least once a year, no matter if the person is in a state of mortal sin or not. 107.77.194.157 (talk) 16:54, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If one would like to know additional names for a thing, they can generally go to the article for that thing, where they will be listed. Remsense ‥ 论 16:56, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 December 2024

[edit]

The section about the calling of the first Crusade needs clarification. It, like every other crusade, was initialized as a pilgrimage, as shown in the initializing speech Urban II gave: <https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/urban2a.asp>. This was not a formal military group, and it lacked leading tacticians or generals because it was not intended as an invasion force. It operated as such when it got to the area around Jerusalem, but that was due to the decision of the group, not the official decree that began the pilgrimage. 135.134.66.100 (talk) 03:49, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: This is original research on your part, and it's clearly missing a lot of context. Please take a look at First Crusade. Remsense ‥ 论 05:03, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Establishing an independent Catholicism article

[edit]

Currently, Catholicism redirects here. The reason was that Catholicism was moved to Catholicism (term) then moved again to Catholicity several years ago in Talk:Catholicity/Archive 6#Requested move 23 August 2017 and Talk:Catholicity/Archive 6#Requested move 10 October 2017. The reason was that the original article did not talk about Catholicism, but instead about the term Catholicity. It is time to finally finish the job.

I believe that Catholicism deserves its own actual article as a major branch of Christianity and the primary topic of WP:CATHOLICISM, similar to its peers Protestantism and Eastern Orthodoxy, and minor branches of Christianity such as Anglicanism. A lot of the content of this article and its related articles would be moved over there, and this article should be more like the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Anglican Communion. Kenneth Kho (talk) 08:53, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help me here. You're thinking of a demonominational article broader about Catholicism, that is distinctly broader the ambit of communion with the Pope? Remsense ‥ 论 08:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If I read Catholic theology correctly, Catholicism would be "as interpreted authoritatively by the magisterium of the Catholic Church", consistent with the Mediation Committee decision in 2009. Kenneth Kho (talk) 09:06, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the clear counterargument here would seem to be, to a degree unmatched in each comparable example, Catholicism as a social, cultural, and confessional reality is coextensive with the particular institution and authority of the church. Clearly, like any thing that includes billions of people, that doesn't mean it's a monolith, but I do not really see how a split along the pattern of the example above is even workable. Remsense ‥ 论 12:22, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Catholicism and Catholic Church are essentially the same thing, I'm confused as to how you're proposing to split it. ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 14:10, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is difficult for me to understand what the Catholics believe and practice, because a lot of the attention in the current article is given to the Church itself. On the other hand, it is very easy to read what the beliefs and practices of Protestantism are. I had to go to Encyclopedia Britannica's entry on Roman Catholicism to be able to much more easily read how Catholicism and Protestantism compare, and I had to guess many readers throughout the past 20 years share my experience. I know that Wikipedia has a page on Catholic theology, but it is much more involved and scholarly than a summary style article. Kenneth Kho (talk) 14:47, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you find the subject very difficult to grasp, I question why you are are proposing this massive restructuring with the confidence that it will clarify matters. It seems like you would not know one way or the other. Remsense ‥ 论 14:49, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did know, by looking at Encyclopedia Britannica, which is unfortunate because Wikipedia has a much larger readership. I am proposing this restructuring for the benefit of other readers. Kenneth Kho (talk) 15:35, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am skeptical presently, but I think I would be interested in what discussion comes of this. Remsense ‥ 论 15:37, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catholic_Church&oldid=1265371128"