 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Merge
editNeither Chasuble-alb nor Alb is able to quite pull off a full article right now. Given the overlap of content, it would be helpful to merge them. -- Pastordavid 03:58, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've never heard of a chasuble-alb. I think Alb is definitely the more notable topic, and this article should be expanded, and chasuble-alb and cassock-alb merged into it. AlexTiefling 09:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed. Johnbod 21:12, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Indeed: the alb has a very separate existence just as the chasuble does. Some modern albs are cut in a sort of all encompassing style that might suggest a chasuble (and are advertised as such) but in no way would be mistaken for a chasuble per se! Exumbra 22:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
- There is no such thing as a chasuble-alb. There is a cassock-alb, but no chasuble-alb. Whoever made the chasuble-alb stub must have been confused. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.81.204.124 (talk) 15:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
The chasible-alb and alb are 2 different objects, the articles should not be merged.-TheGiftedSlayer (talk) 05:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Twelfth oldest
editThe text currently lists the alb as the "twelfth oldest liturgical garment". This is a very precise claim made with no supporting evidence, and doesn't link into any timeline of liturgical garments that I can easily find. I note the original sentence was simply "oldest" and an anonymous commenter added "twelfth" with no explanation (diff) which makes me suspicious. Quick googling suggests the original statement may conflate alb and sticharion (e.g. this page or this book) but I'm no expert. However, the current statement seems unhelpful even if accurate as it doesn't provide any context. -- Shimmin Beg (talk) 21:39, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Removed sentence
editI removed this sentence from the variants section: "(Both not allowed in Roman Catholic Rite)". It contradicted what was said in the body of the section and so I faced a choice. Removing this sentence or re-writing the main body. I chose to remove the sentence because technically there is no such thing as the "Roman Catholic Rite". There is a "Roman Rite" but that doesn't fit as that is just a liturgy. There is also the "Latin Church" or the "Latin Rite". I figured anyone with full knowledge would not have made that mistake. They would have used the correct terms. Plus the formatting was incorrect, with its parenthesis at the top of the section and a source that was not properly formatted. Therefore I removed it per the requirement to WP:BEBOLD.--Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 12:45, 8 March 2019 (UTC)