Talk:Catholic Church in Georgia

Confusing writing

"In 1917 when Georgia cut off ecclesiastical ties from the Moscow Patriarchate and some Georgians closed to already existing Georgian Catholic Church Byzantine Rite."

Is it just me, or does this not make any sense?

It's not just you. This article seems like it was run through some automatic translation software. —Preost ^{talk contribs} 23:46, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I have partially reverted this article to the fuller version, as I an trying to avoid removing any information from it.

69.34.63.125 04:29, 10 July 2006 (UTC)Signature

I don't know that that was a particularly intelligent thing to do. The information supposedly 'removed' is all there later in the article; my edit presented it in a better order and removed some duplication. You've reverted to a version that's less well organised and more repetitious. C0pernicus 15:25, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Recent edit war

There seems to be an edit war regarding what this article should cover, I'd propose to solve this by moving article to something Georgian Byzantine Catholic Church and merging the relevent information into Roman Catholicism in Georgia, which should in term be moved to Catholic Church in Georgia (as should all the articles in the series be moved from Roman Catholicism in N. to Catholic Church in N. btw.) --212.76.33.109 23:44, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Anonymous 212. "Georgian Catholic Church" means the same as "Roman Catholicism in Georgia" and "Georgian Byzantine Catholic Church" makes sense as a title. However, as a representation of fact, it does not make sense: according to the rules governing Eastern Rite Catholic Churches, in particular canon 27 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, there is no such thing as a Georgian Byzantine Catholic Church. Anonymous 65/69/209 admits that the alleged Church is not recognized as a Church by the Vatican; canon 27 says such recognition is an essential element in being an Eastern Rite Catholic Church, along with being under a hierarchy of its own.

For this morning, I am leaving in Wikipedia the text placed by Anonymous 65/69/209, adding requests for citations for some of the false and quite unsourced statements that same anonymous editor is so fond of. If there is no response, I will, of course, restore the version that gives sources for what it says.

I look forward to some response here from Anonymous 65/69/209. Lima 04:27, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I see that Anonymous 65/69/209 is making no attempt to justify his/her unsourced self-contradictory text. I am therefore restoring the fact-based text. Lima 07:27, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Anonymous 65/69/209 has once again reverted to a text based on fantasy, adding a further source-less (because merely personal) fantasy that, before the Second Vatican Council, the Holy See accepted as Eastern Catholic Churches what it does not now. Does Anonymous 65/69/209 think persistence will obtain something for which he/she can finds no rational justifying arguments to put forward here? Lima 05:08, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

In accordance with the suggestion by Anonymous 212, I have written a specific Georgian Byzantine-Rite Catholics article, and placed a reference to it at the start of this article. Lima 06:14, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I have maintained persistance to keep the truth from being white-washed. Georgian Byzantine Catholics are a valid topic and there is evidence from numerous sources they existed. The totality of eastern catholicism includes those eastern catholics who are under "Latin" administration. In addition, evidence has clearly been sited both here and in the Eastern Rite Catholic Churches article and discussion page that they did exist. Whether they still do now is not the issue, I feel enough evidence exists to merit their attention. I also feel that to continue to remove references and ignore or ridicule evidence from published sources is counter-productive to an encyclopedia entry that should strive to maintain a NPOV towards the information it is presenting.

69.68.167.247 17:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)A

I hope Anonymous 65/69/209 (why doesn't s/he adopt a log-in name?) is now content: Georgian Byzantine-Rite Catholics now have their own page consisting of matter all of which was already in Georgian Catholic Church and Eastern Rite Catholic Churches. Nobody ever denied they existed, only that they were in fact classified as a Church. Lima 19:30, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Georgian Catholic Church. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070302171843/http://www.cnewa.org:80/ecc-bodypg.aspx?eccpageID=77&indexview=toc: to http://www.cnewa.org/ecc-bodypg.aspx?eccpageID=77&indexview=toc:

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:48, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 28 October 2016

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: Moved (non-admin closure) Fuortu (talk) 11:42, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

---

Catholic Church in Georgia (country) → Catholic Church in Georgia – No reasons to complicate the article name with the brackets, when the simplier form redirects to the more complicated one with brackets. Chicbyaccident (Please notify with {{SUBST:re}} (Talk) 07:48, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose if it already directs there what's the point of removing (country) in the drop-down choices? In ictu oculi (talk) 16:17, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

  "what's the point of keeping (country) in the drop-down choices if it already directs there?" Wow, it's almost like if this worked both ways. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 09:36, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose. It's necessary to distinguish from Georgia (U.S. state). While we don't currently have an article on Catholic Church in Georgia (U.S. state), it's not out of reason to believe that it would be written in the future. There's a bit of information regarding Georgia at Catholic Church in the United States and we already have Category:Roman Catholic Church in Georgia (U.S. state), for example. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose per Tavix, however, I would support a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT at this time. CookieMonster755 𝚨-𝛀 21:28, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
• Support Per Wikipedia_talk:Disambiguation/Archive 45#Request for Comment: Disambiguation and inherently ambiguous titles, disambiguation is only necessary when there is a title conflict between two articles. Pppery 23:13, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
• Support per Pppery provided that a hatnote is included that links to Catholic Church in the United States and/or Ecclesiastical Province of Atlanta and/or both Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Atlanta & Roman Catholic Diocese of Savannah. An article entitled Catholic Church in Georgia (U.S. state) seems unlikely given that I know no precedent for such a subnational article nor does it make sense to have such an article in addition to the two diocesan articles. But, more importantly, we don't disambiguate merely because we believe it to be possible that the creation of such an article could have merit in the future, especially when it does not at present. 207.161.217.209 (talk) 22:02, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
• Support per Pppery. Our policy/guidelines are clear on this matter. We only need disambiguators where there is an actual article clash. A hatnote will be fine to link to the general US catholic church articles as 207.161.217.209 says. Furthermore, as the IP also says, I don't think we'll ever have an article on the US state. The catholic church doesn't particularly organise itself along those lines.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:59, 4 November 2016 (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 one external link on Catholic Church in Georgia. 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/20060713000246/http://www.damian-hungs.de/Unierte%20Ostkirchen%20I..html to http://www.damian-hungs.de/Unierte%20Ostkirchen%20I..html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 02:52, 17 September 2017 (UTC)