Talk:Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh

Talk:Personal Ordinariate

Apart from the Traditional Anglican Communion, the article should really consider verifying whether groups within the Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh have ever sought a similar canonical structure to the proposed personal ordinariates. ADM (talk) 05:35, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Name change (2)

User:DBD has renamed the article to Diocese of Pittsburgh (Anglican Church in North America). The edit summary says the following, "(DBD moved page Talk:Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh to Talk:Diocese of Pittsburgh (Anglican Church in North America): prefix Anglican incorrect (not actual Anglicans))". I didn't know Wikipedia was qualified to determine who was Anglican or not. This is obviously a POV move made with no discussion, and it should be reversed immediately. I would reverse this myself, but I'm not sure if I can or not. Ltwin (talk) 17:11, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

While the edit summary contained a non-NPOV editorial comment, the new page name itself is perfectly accurate and neutral. Angr (talk) 17:50, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Except that the previously name is the actual name of the organization and is perfectly accurate and neutral to. Why change the name from the simple and clean "Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh" to the clumsy "Diocese of Pittsburgh (Anglican Church in North America)"? Despite the fact that the diocese is not apart of the Anglican Communion, no one here seriously can say they aren't Anglican if they indeed call themselves that. Therefore, why the need to play these semantic games? Ltwin (talk) 17:54, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree with the previous user. The official name of the diocese is Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh, as anyone can see by their official website:[1]. They are Anglicans, as part of the Anglican Church in North America, who holds a special place in the Anglican world, because while they are still not yet a member of the Anglican Communion, they are candidates to join and are already in full communion with the Anglican churches of Nigeria, Uganda and Sudan. They were already recognized officially by the Church of England as fully Anglican, like their wish to remain in the Anglican family. You can read more about the relationship between the Anglican Church in North America and the Anglican Communion in the Wikipedia article about the church. By the way, all the church members of the Anglican realignment recognize the ACNA as fully Anglican, so there isn't even a question on that.Mistico (talk) 18:58, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

What is the rational for the "(ACNA)" in the title though? I mean, I could understand it if there were more than one organization claiming to be the "Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh". But if there is, there isn't a Wikipedia article on it. I was troubled by the motivation behind the previous change, in addition to the clumsiness of it. But I can live with the current version. However, I don't see why we can't just return it to what it was before the non-NPOV motivated changes took place. Ltwin (talk) 05:03, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

It's just needed to ask an administrator to please move to the previous form.Mistico (talk) 00:23, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I asked an administrator to make the move and to please warn that user for being disruptive. The name of the diocese is really Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh, it is member of a Anglican church, who is a candidate to join the Anglican Communion. There isn't even a question on that, so like it was agreed on Talk Page, the name of the entry should be Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh.Mistico (talk) 23:29, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

A case can be made out for putting ACNA in brackets after the name of the Diocese in the interests of ensuring clarity. What is unacceptable is to prefix it as if it were part of the name of the Diocese and to eliminate the word "Anglican" which is part of of the Diocese's legal name in this case. this is particularly true in the case of the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth (ACNA) where there is an obvious risk of confusion arising. The same user has made similar edits in the Article on the Anglican Church of the Southern Cone of America and I am reverting them. Jpacobb (talk) 16:43, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree totally. But since there is no other diocese named Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh, not even at the Traditional Anglican Communion, there is no need for the ACNA reference in the name title.Mistico (talk) 21:08, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved (in 2012!) (non-admin closure). Kharkiv07^Talk 18:25, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

---

Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh (ACNA) → Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh – Like it was agreed on Talk Page, the name of the diocese should go back to the previous form. This is the real name of the diocese and there is no need for the ACNA because they can't be confused with a diocese with a similar name. There is no other with the same name and while the ACNA isn't yet a member of the Anglican Communion, they are recognized as Anglican by the Church of England and by the church members of the Anglican realignment movement, and are in full communion with the Anglican churches of Nigeria, Uganda and Sudan. Wikipedia isn't the place to decide what is Anglican or not, and there isn't even a question on this case.Mistico (talk) 14:22, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131227094158/http://www.pitanglican.org/media/Section_F.pdf to http://www.pitanglican.org/media/Section_F.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131227105455/http://www.pitanglican.org/media/2012_Pre_Convention_Journal_29_Oct.pdf to http://www.pitanglican.org/media/2012_Pre_Convention_Journal_29_Oct.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110609133410/http://www.bchistory.org/beavercounty/BeaverCountyTopical/Churches/ChurchesbyDenomination/Episcopal/StLukeMW1982/StLukeEpiscopalMW82.html to http://www.bchistory.org/beavercounty/BeaverCountyTopical/Churches/ChurchesbyDenomination/Episcopal/StLukeMW1982/StLukeEpiscopalMW82.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081008012205/http://www.episcopalchurch.org:80/79901_101322_ENG_HTM.htm to http://www.episcopalchurch.org/79901_101322_ENG_HTM.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:55, 14 October 2016 (UTC)