Template talk:Infobox diocese/Archive 1

Archive 1

Patron field

The "patron" field renders as "Patron saint"; I notice that some Catholic entities using the other template have non-canonised types as a patron: for example, Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham. Perhaps a "patron_title" field defaulting to "patron saint" would be a means of addressing this. Smartiger (talk) 21:49, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure, we can do that. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:22, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

That seems to have fixed that very nicely, thanks. Smartiger (talk) 02:57, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Anglican Communion parameter

{{Infobox diocese}} has the "rite" parameter to cover the different rites of the Catholic Church. I suggest there should be an "anglican_communion" parameter to cover the different churches in the Anglican Communion: e.g. Church of England, Scottish Episcopal Church, Anglican Church of Australia, etc. After all it is meant to be a multi-denominational template. -- Scrivener-uki (talk) 23:14, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Isn't that largely redundant with the "territory" and/or "country" parameters? Smartiger (talk) 05:14, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

The "territory" and/or "country" parameters haven't anything to do with the proposed "anglican_communion" parameter. As I said above, the "rite" parameter covers the different Autonomous particular Churches or Rites of the Catholic Church - e.g. Latin Rite, Ambrosian Rite, Gallican Rite, Mozarabic Rite, etc. The Anglican Communion has the different churches which make up the communion. So I suggest an "anglican_communion" parameter added just below the "rite" parameter. In short, the "rite" parameter distinguishes the different Catholic churches and the "anglican_communion" parameter would distinguish the different Anglican Communion churches. -- Scrivener-uki (talk) 12:37, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Any objections? If not, I will add this in a bit. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:34, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

If one is regarding the Anglican Communion as a single body, its constituent churches correspond to different territories (frequently one-to-one with modern or historical countries), which is why I suggested those parameters. This still seems like it's "overspecialising" to a particular denomination, for no clear benefit. Furthermore, the suggested name is far from transparent: "anglican_communion" is not especially suggestive of "church which is a member of..." If the purpose here is to get the name of church into the infobox, wouldn't a "church" or "particular_church" parameter be both more generally applicable, and more clearly named for its intended purpose? Smartiger (talk) 17:53, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Than rather having "anglican_communion" and "rite" parameters, which both "overspecialising" to a particular denomination, they be replaced with a "denomination" parameter. It works quite well with Template:Infobox church. -- Scrivener-uki (talk) 12:54, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I think that technically that's "denominational body" rather than "denomination" in this context, but that seems fairly suitable too. Not sure it'll fly to replace "rite", but it seems like a step in the right direction. Smartiger (talk) 00:34, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Are we in agreement with having the "denomination" paramenter just below the "rite" parameter? Having thought further about the "rite" parameter it is probably best to keep it, which is not a mandatory parameter. -- Scrivener-uki (talk) 16:32, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

If I were to have it in the "information" block, I'd put it immediately above rite, since if one is going to use both, as Catholic sees might wish to, that would seem to be the better order. I notice that infobox_church places it right after "country", but that wouldn't work unmodified here as that's in a "location" block. Alternatively, it could go immediately above that, after the name/jurisdiction/etc fields. Smartiger (talk) 19:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I have no objection with the "denomination" parameter placed just above the "rite" parameter, in fact they are better to be in that order. I agree the "denomination" parameter wouldn't work in the "location" block. Its best place is in the "Information" block along with the "rite" parameter. Are we in agreement with that? -- Scrivener-uki (talk) 00:19, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I'd be fine with that, at least in the short run. Perhaps it should ultimately be reworked to be somewhat more consistent with the format of infobox_church, but that sounds like another day's work. Smartiger (talk) 01:02, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I added a "denomination" parameter. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:47, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that this might need a "denomination_title" too, before much longer... Smartiger (talk) 05:01, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Suffragan see

In the case of Metropolitan sees in the Catholic church, it may be interesting to have a parameter "Suffragan see(s)". What do you think?--Alberto Fernandez Fernandez (talk) 14:11, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

IMO this would be undesirable in an archdiocese/diocese template because there is already sufficient confusion of the relationship between an archdiocese (just another diocese, only larger) and a metropolitan province consisting of several dioceses. If there was a metropolis template, suffragan dioceses would almost be a mandatory parameter. Student7 (talk) 19:30, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Catholic church - add a "type" parameter

I would suggest to add a type parameter to the infobox to incorporate the diversity to the particular churches in the Catholic Church. In the Catholic Church, sees may fall into 25 different types of dioceses (Detailed listing http://www.gcatholic.com/dioceses/types.htm). Some sees also have the title of Primatial sees (Primate (bishop)) like the Diocese of Rome. This would complement the parameter "jurisdiction" allowing to link to the wikipage explaining to the term without wikilinking the title of the infobox. As example in the case of territorial prelatures like Territorial Prelature of Loreto, the title of the box would read "Territorial... " and the link to territorial prelate would come in the box. What do you think? --Alberto Fernandez Fernandez (talk) 14:22, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Isn't that going to be a little repetitious, if essentially the same text appears twice? If this is primary for the sake of the link, presumably that will generally appear in the text in any event. Smartiger (talk) 01:12, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Are you sure the list is correct? Note that this is not vatican.org or anything official. Would be nice to distinguish military from titular, for example, if not in text. Smartiger does have a point about duplication of material that may need changing later. On the other hand, nice to have something to fall back on when a vandal hits the site!

About half the dioceses in the world are "Mission Dioceses." This is not mentioned at all in that list and is significant information IMO. Student7 (talk) 19:57, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Moving parameters

I'm wondering whether it would be better to move the "|priests=" parameter from the "Information" block to the "Statistics" block? It gives the number of priests in the diocese/archdiocese and would keep in with the number of parishes, churches, schools, etc.
Also would it better to move the "|metropolitan=" parameter from the "Locations" block to the "Current leadership" block? Who ever is the Metropolitan is a person not a location. The parameter is in the "Current leadership" block in the {{Infobox Roman Catholic diocese}}. -- Scrivener-uki (talk) 14:59, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Overall, I think that it might be better to move towards a format more in line with {{Infobox church}}, where there's an initial block with no header line, mainly with "location" information, but also covering denomination and which might also be the place to cover the Metropolitan. If the headers are kept as they they, though, your moves seem to me to make sense. Smartiger (talk) 18:06, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I did add |metro_archbishop= while I was merging the "Roman Catholic diocese" template. Should we change "metropolitan" to "location" to avoid confusion? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I am assuming, perhaps wrongly, that "Metropolitan" means: "who is diocesan metropolitan". If I am correct, the Diocese of St. Augustine would have "Wenski"? A bit unclear, right?

I would feel uncomfortable removing a current parameter. Wouldn't that potentially disrupt a lot of users? It might force them to think about what is there. IMO the parameter needs to list what we expect there and I am not sure, right now, what that is. A person, for example? Or a title? "Archbishop of Miami"? The latter wouldn't change very often. That would be nice.

What would an archdiocesan metropolitan read? The Bishop of Rome? Himself? That seems silly! Student7 (talk) 14:35, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

When I was merging "Infobox Roman Catholic diocese", I noticed that each box listed (1) the pope, and (2) the archbishop of the greater metropolitan area. In the case that it was a diocese and not an archdiocese, there was also a bishop for the diocese. While merging these, if it was an archdiocese, and not a diocese, I used the |bishop= and |bishop_title=Archbishop. If it was a diocese, and not an archdiocese, then I put the bishop in the bishop field and the archbishop in the metro_archbishop field. The |pope= field seems a bit redundant, since it is the same pope for all Roman Catholic diocese. However, since it was in the other infobox, and the TFD outcome was to merge the two, I merged it. I think the potential problem comes from the fact that "metropolitan" was used for "metropolitan archbishop" in the Roman Catholic box, but seems to be commonly used for the "metropolitan area" in this infobox. My suggestion for changing this would involve changing the label for this field to "location", adding an optional |location= parameter, which would do the exact same thing as what |metropolitan= does now, then deprecating the "metropolitan" parameter. I could even have a bot change them all, since it would be in the context of the merger, and my bot is approved to make changes to assist with outcomes of WP:TFDs. What do you think? Is there a better option, or is this just not a problem? Moving the |priests= to the statistics block is far easier, since it just requires a minor change here. I can do that as well if there are no objections. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 17:03, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

I'd a look at some transclusions, and the metropolitan field (at the least) includes both links to the metropolitan area, and to the archdiocese. It's also possible that some of them list the archbishop, as suggested above. In principle sorting these out could be done by a bot, but I'd suggest it's non-straightforward enough that it's somewhat beyond the scope of a typical template merger activity. On the more general point, deprecating the metropolitan field as unduly ambiguous seems like a very good idea. I'd have thought that "province" would be the form of essentially this information that would make most sense; but not all provinces have their own articles, so that might be less convenient. Smartiger (talk) 03:24, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

I actually came here to comment because I noticed that most of the dioceses in the USA (spot-check of other countries shows the same tendency) are listing the diocese's see city in the metropolitan field, example; a few even list the street address of their own chancery/cathedral, example. This is incorrect, as the metropolitan field should list either the metropolitan archdiocese or the metropolitan archbishop of the province. I would agree with deprecating the metropolitan field in favor of merging the purpose with the province field. In the case that the province has no article, or there is no appropriate section in a country-level article (e.g. |province=Province of San Antonio, as the USA dioceses use), linking to the metropolitan archdiocese should be sufficient (e.g. |province=Lima, as I saw on some Latin American dioceses), since there are very few cases where the province name is distinct from the metropolitan's name. Dr Ishmael (talk) 03:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Diocesan priests

This template is used in the article Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham, which is an ordinariate and not a diocese. The parameter "priests" displays as "Diocesan priests" which is inaccurate for the article. The proper term for "diocesan" priests is "secular priests", as opposed to "regular priests" who live by a rule. Can we change the displayed value to reflect the proper, official term instead, so it is accurate for every article, including those which are not dioceses? Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 13:11, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

This may be one of those rare times when parameters should be linked in a template: regular clergy and secular priests. These terms can't be immediately identified by most Catholics I would guess. And therefore rarely by non-Catholics. Student7 (talk) 17:59, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Metropolitan

I have noticed a pretty widespread error on the infoboxes for dioceses. Over, and over, they indicate that the local see city where the bishop's residence is located is the "Metropolitan." This is just not accurate. For example, Diocese of Gaylord says that the Metropolitan is "Gaylord, Michigan." This is wrong twice over, first because a metropolitan is a bishop, not a town; and second because it is (for Gaylord) the Archbishop of Detroit, not the Bishop of Gaylord. Virtually any other infobox has the same mistake; see, e.g., Diocese of Burlington. MrArticleOne (talk) 21:46, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Coordinate?

What is this parameter supposed to mean? The diocese is usually spread over an area and thus cant be attributed particular coordinates. Am I misunderstanding something? This is in turn leading to " coordinates missing" tagging of all articles of dioceses. ~ ScitDei^{Wanna talk?} 10:25, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

There have been a number of "fans" of various data, one of which has been "coordinates." I do not find this information useful. I don't see why we shouldn't remove it by discussing it in the template discussion page. Probably other infobox pages as well. Student7 (talk) 22:39, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Rite

What is the proper use of the field "Rite"? A diocese does not have a "rite", it belongs to an autonomous particular church; in the Catholic Church, this is one of 23 sui iuris Churches, of which the Latin Church is the largest and best-known. But there are 22 Eastern Catholic Churches. Sometimes their dioceses are called eparchies. But the problem at hand is the use of the murky term "Latin Rite" in many, almost all, the infoboxes that use the "Rite" field. Many sources, including the Church's official documents, use "Latin Rite" in various ways, especially to actually refer to the Latin Church. Sometimes it refers to the Roman Rite, which is the best-known Rite of the Latin Church. But a diocese should always be associated not with a Rite, but a Church. The bulk of dioceses will be members of the Latin Church, and some will be the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, and so forth. But how can we express this in the infobox? Particular church? Sui iuris church? We need to rename this field, because it is misused and misunderstood. Elizium23 (talk) 07:36, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what the original intent was, but I would hope that this would be used for either Latin rite (Roman) or Byzantium rite (Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom).

You may be correct about needing a different parameter to express use of a particular rite. That might mean changing a bunch of now-useless parameters from "rite=" to "particular church=". Maybe we could leave rite, right where it is and add "particular church="? Student7 (talk) 00:02, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I have renamed the parameter named "particular_church" to "sui_iuris_church" per discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism#Latin rite, Roman rite. Please note that the field "rite" now refers unambiguously to the liturgical rite(s) used in that diocese/eparchy and not to the Church membership thereof. Please also note that dioceses are not formally pigeonholed based on their usage of liturgical rites, and the rite listed in the infobox is not an exhaustive list. For example, the Dominican Rite is permissible for use by priests of the Dominican Order under Summorum Pontificum and has less to do with their geographical diocese location than with their own organizational structure in provinces and religious houses, with permission granted by their ordinary, the religious superior, not by the diocesan bishop. Anyway, please refer future discussion to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism in order to reach an appropriate audience. Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 22:29, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that! As little as I like foreign phrases in the English Wikipedia, "particular church" has always sounded a bit peculiar in English. Student7 (talk) 20:33, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Merger with Orthodox diocese infobox

per this discussion, I am adding some parameters for Metropolitanate of Karlovci, Metropolitanate of Belgrade, and Patriarchate of Karlovci (and probably more). let me know if there are any problems with my additions. Frietjes (talk) 17:23, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Diocesan officers

Would it be possible to add a new category, after "Leadership", of "Diocesan Officers"? In the Anglican Communion, there are officers in each diocese, such as the Chancellor, the Registrar and the Archivist, who carry out functions under the canon law of the diocese. It would be useful to have an entry for those officers in the infobox. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 07:08, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm thinking that it isn't really a good idea to add more people, for two reasons: 1) the article will be about the diocese, not individuals. The leader of the diocese, usually a bishop, should be named. The others should be omitted anyway, even in the article about the diocese. 2) If this starts happening, we are going to have to split this infobox into whatever categories that aren't ambiguous:"Infobox Catholic diocese", "Infobox Lutheran diocese", etc. Student7 (talk) 17:14, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Leadership: can it include an entry for Dean?

Could a new line be added under the "Leadership" category for the Dean of the diocesan cathedral? In the Anglican Communion, the Dean has functions under canon law, filling in for the Bishop if the Bishop is not available and there is no suffragan bishop. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 07:08, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

"Dean (Christianity)" means something different in Catholic diocese. I'd rather skip it or rename it "Anglican dean" which seems to lead to renaming/naming other positions as well. See above. I think the Vicar general fulfills the same purpose for Catholics, except they may have a suffragan bishop, as well, though not often used nowdays. Student7 (talk) 17:20, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Ecclesiastical regions

Add a region parameter linking to the ecclesiastical regions (to-do article) and fix the template to host the data of the Italian Template:Regione ecclesiastica della chiesa cattolica. -- Vicipaedianus X 13:33, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Part harmonising with Template:Infobox Christian denomination

May I suggest that this template harmonises a bit with Template:Infobox Christian denomination? They arguably share a few preconditions and could thus probably look little more consistent insofar as they overlap. Chicbyaccident (talk) 13:12, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Edit request

Can you please change the date of the merge discussion for this template to September 20. Thanks. Pkbwcgs (talk) 15:33, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:01, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Edit request - 12 November 2018

Please add, immediately under the auxiliary bishops parameter, a new parameter, linked to Assistant bishop:

| assistant_bishops = <!-- List most senior first (usually reckoned by date of consecration) -->

Thanks in advance, Bahnfrend (talk) 09:44, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Better Arabic Translation

The arabic version of the infobox have problems translating some terms. I have contributed a better translation to it using the manage templatedata button. But I am not sure if this would affect the arabic articles using the same infobox. Can you please see into it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ندمار (talk • contribs) 00:09, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 2 March 2019

Incumbent solely refers to the current holder of an office and not to an officeholder in general. Thus please change the parameter first incumbent to first holder or something else, but just change it. Colonestarrice (talk) 12:10, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done $\color {blue}\chi$_chi (talk) 15:46, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Permanent Deacons

Considering that an increasing amount of spiritual and temporal work in parishes and chanceries is being done by Permanent Deacons, might there be a line following the line priests = to read permanent deacons =  ?

--Vicedomino (talk) 03:43, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Variable: "see"

As seen in Template:Infobox Christian leader. Would that be a solution? PPEMES (talk) 23:26, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Edit request for colours

Could we harmonize rendering colours rendered for different denominations with Template:Infobox Pope styles, Template:Infobox Christian leader, Template:Infobox church? More specifically, "gold" for Catholic Church as typically rendered rather than red, if I haven't missed any specific reason for why there is no precurrent consistency? PPEMES (talk) 23:11, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Red is the traditional color of the Church; it's flag and stemma are plain red. It represents the blood of the martyrs of the Church Militant. --Vicedomino (talk) 05:14, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Might be. I didn't come up with the original idea of actual colour. I just inquired about the consistency. Would you mind sharing the arguments about the actual colour at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism? PPEMES (talk) 08:14, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Gonfalone of the Church --Vicedomino (talk) 19:34, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 17 May 2019

Emeritus Bishops: this should read "Bishops emeritus", as emeritus normally goes after the title and there's no need for it to be capitalised. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 16:28, 17 May 2019 (UTC) — RAVENPVFF · talk · 16:28, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

 Done Cabayi (talk) 17:09, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 10 October 2019

Please change template call {{ifempty}} to {{if empty}} to avoid the redirect. The call to that template is transcluded in nearly 4,000 articles through being called in this template, so that unnecessary redirect has to be followed every time one of those articles is viewed. Colonies Chris (talk) 16:15, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template. For further discussion see User talk:Colonies Chris. --Trialpears (talk) 16:29, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Add support for Patriarchates

Currently, the top colored bars support archbishoprics and bishoprics, but do not support patriarchates. These are common in Eastern Orthodoxy, Eastern Catholicism, and rarely in the Catholic Latin Church. Their only options right now are to leave the parameter empty (e.g. Patriarch of Moscow and all Rus') or enter archbishopric, which is inaccurate (e.g. Patriarch of Venice). I propose adding a |patriarchate= parameter that functions the same way as |archbishopric= and |bishopric=. Ergo Sum 14:58, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

parameter "Catholics"

The addition of the comment including non-members makes the line nothing but gibberish. I know what is intended (non-practicing, or lapsed or baptized), but how can you have a statement of number of members and include non-members???

Better just to delete the comment.

--Vicedomino (talk) 18:03, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Assistant bishops as alternative for suffragans

Would it be possible to allow "Assistant bishops" as an alternative for the "Suffragans" entry in this infobox? - in the Anglican Church of Australia, for example, the term "suffragan" is generally not used [see The Assistant Bishops' Canon 1966 - the assistants play the same role. Deus et lex (talk) 00:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Deus et lex, your link is a 404... Elizium23 (talk) 01:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

@Elizium23: - sorry, fixed. Deus et lex (talk) 01:51, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

That sounds like an auxiliary bishop. Elizium23 (talk) 02:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

The Anglican Church doesn't have auxiliary bishops. Assistant bishops are the same as suffragans, they just have a different title. All I'm asking is being able to accommodate that for those parts of the Anglican Communion that use an alternative title. Deus et lex (talk) 02:56, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, any chance of this being approved? I note in passing that I'm the second person to make this request (the above request suggested it as an alternative to auxiliary bishops - which I'm also fine with). Deus et lex (talk) 08:53, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Can anyone action this? @Elizium23:? Deus et lex (talk) 09:40, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Pinging @Heraklitcnl:, @Galobtter:, @X:, @Trialpears: (users who have closed previous requests on this page) as it has now been almost two weeks since I had a response. Deus et lex (talk) 22:30, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

@Deus et lex: This seems like an uncontroversial and rather minor edit. I will try to complete it soon. Please remind me if I forget. In the meantime, if others can address it sooner, please go ahead. Ergo Sum 02:22, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you - appreciate you responding so quickly. Deus et lex (talk) 02:39, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done @Deus et lex: Was a bit trickier than I was expecting. My syntax skills are rusty. Please let me know if the new {{{assistant_bishops}}} and {{{assistant_bishop}}} parameters are functioning properly. Ergo Sum 04:43, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ergo Sum: - thanks so much, it's working fine, Bahnfrend has helpfully tried it out (in the plural) at Anglican Diocese of Sydney, and I've tried it (in the singular) at Anglican Diocese of Tasmania. Deus et lex (talk) 05:24, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

@Ergo Sum: - actually, very minor thing but the link to Assistant bishop uses an underscore rather than a space. Otherwise fine. Deus et lex (talk) 05:26, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm not seeing the link with an underscore in it. Can you give me an example of where that's happening? Ergo Sum 05:36, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Apologies, I think that was me misreading the link - it is fine. Sorry and thanks again for your help. Deus et lex (talk) 05:42, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

'Catholicos or Maphrian' parameter required for Orthodox Church

@Ergo Sum: 'Catholicos or Maphrian' parameter required for Syriac Orthodox Church. It can be an alternative for Major Archbishop. Jude Didimus (talk) 10:18, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Diocesan Administrator

Could a field be added after Apostolic Administrator, to name a Diocesan Administrator if the Diocese doesn't have a bishop or Apostolic Administrator such as what the Catholic Diocese of Leeds currently has [1].Mharris99 (talk) 20:35, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

I would rather not see this. It is a transitory phenomenon. The Apostolic Administrator is not really that prominent, and is, indeed, merely an "administrator" with little policy initiative. He is replaced in short order by a bishop usually nominated by his metropolitan and officially named by the Vatican. This might be different for illness, I admit. Student7 (talk) 20:12, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it's always a temporary situation. Best practice probably would be to put "(Vacant) <br><name>, Diocesan Adminiatrator" or "(Vacant) <br><name>, Apostolic Administrator" (where <name> is the name of the administrator) in the tag for the diocesan bishop. This will display as "(Vacant)" with the name and type of administrator on the next line. And from the time that a new bishop is chosen until he takes office, one can append "<br><name2>, Bishop Elect" to display the name of the bishop elect on the subsequent line. In the (extremely rare) situation where there's an administrator because the diocesan bishop is impeded, the same practice will work except leaving the name of the diocesan bishop in place of (Vacant) in this format. Norm1979 (talk) 15:40, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Leadership: Can Primate be added?

Could an entry be added for "Primate", please? That is the title used in some of the churches in the Anglican communion for the leader of the church at a national level. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 19:01, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I suggest that this title goes with the individual rather than the diocese, even though the Primate normally is bishop of a certain diocese. That is, the attribute belongs to the person, not the diocese. The diocese could (theoretically) be changed. But the person would retain the title "Primate." Student7 (talk) 17:23, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, this is another term that various denominations use differently. In the Catholic Church, a primate is the bishop of the first diocese erected in a particular country, and that role may range from purely honorific (ceremonial precedence), as in the case of the Archbishop of Baltimore here in the United States, to an ex officio role of leadership defined by the statues of the respective episcopal conference. But at the other extreme, the Primate of the Traditional Anglican Church (TAC) is essentially that denomination's pope. Norm1979 (talk) 15:54, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Suppressed See?

Could someone add a section for Suppressed? I am trying to work on Titular Sees and they aren't dissolved. Gi22account (talk) 13:57, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

@Gi22account:, what you are proposing might be in the "too hard" category. The problem here is that a titular see is not necessarily the title of a suppressed diocese.
* The Diocese of Walla Walla (Washington) was abandoned, but never apparently canonically suppressed even though the Diocese of Oregon City assumed administration of its territory and later reorganized as the Diocese of Nesqually -- the see of which was later transferred to Seattle. This made both Walla Walla and Nesqually available for use as titular sees.
* The see of the Diocese of Bardstown was transferred to Louisville, making Bardstown available for use as a titular see.
If the info box for a titular see is going to account for how the title became available for that use, it needs to reflect all of the possibilities (canonical suppression, transfer of see, abandonment, merger, and possibly several other scenarios. We should think this through thoroughly before making changes. Norm1979 (talk) 20:39, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Singular/Plural

I'm not sure, how to fix it but usually there is only one vicar general, so the "s" should be removed from the box. On the other hand there may be more than one auxilary bishop, so I would recomand an "s" there. --Heraklitcnl (talk) 12:35, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done --Heraklitcnl (talk) 16:16, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

@Heraklitcnl:, in the Catholic Church, it's up to the bishop of each diocese whether he wishes to have one vicar general or several. Some bishops of larger dioceses appoing all of their auxiliary bishops as vicars general, while others appoint one auxiliary bishop as vicar general and the rest as episcopal vicars. The safest approach actually seems to be to have the tag say "Vicar(s) general" to allow for both cases. Norm1979 (talk) 21:17, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of CIC 475 §2. Thanks for your answer. --Heraklitcnl (talk) 16:01, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 17 June 2022

The TemplateData should be changed so that:

1. 'sui_iuris_church' and 'latin' are not automatically included. The reason is that those parameters are completely useless for non-Catholic denominations, since this terminology (sui iuris) only exists in Catholicism and that Latin is the official language only of the Catholic Church
2. 'language' is not automatically included. The reason is that most of the time there is no information available to know the language (I guess it means liturgical language and not the local language of the inhabitants; 'language' is very vague...), and that having this parameter always present encourages people to add what they believe is the language by making wild guesses and speculations (thus hindering WP:V)

Veverve (talk) 08:31, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. The code that governs TemplateData, strangely, lives on the documentation page, which is typically not protected. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:27, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Episcopal conference

For Catholic dioceses, would it be recommended to put the Episcopal Conference in the country section or do people feel there ought to be a separate parameter for this? Vesuvio14 (talk) 11:53, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

I oppose including the conference unless a separate parameter was created (it would be right under province, in my preference). ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:49, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

@Pbritti: I think I'd agree with you. Would you also be in favour of adding ecclesiastical region to this infobox? Vesuvio14 (talk) 17:32, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

@Vesuvio14: I support it but only in situations where clarification is necessary (like the Caribbean). ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:45, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

@Pbritti: and @Vesuvio14:, we should be careful of the order of these tags. The ecclesiastical province and the episcopal conference are part of the ecclesiastical organization and the former always lies within the latter, so these tags should be together -- probably with episcopal conference first. The country, however, pertains to civil governance so it should not come within the block for ecclesiastical structure.

In the episcopal conferences that are divided into regions, most ecclesiastical provinces seem to lie within a single region -- but not all. Here in the States, for example, the Diocese of Salt lake City is in Region XIII but it belongs to the Metropolitan Province of San Francisco, the rest of which is in Region XI. So if there's a separate tag for the ecclesiastical region, it's probably best positioned after the tag for the episcopal conference and before the tag for the ecclesiastical province.

The bottom line here is that nothing is perfect, but the order probably should be Episcopal Conference - Ecclesiastical Region (if a separate tag) - Ecclesiastical Province

And, JTOL, I'm wondering if the term actually should be "Metropolitan Province" or simply "Metropolitan" rather than "Ecclesiastical Province" because that term is both correct for the Roman Rite and consistent with the usage of the Orthodox Communion and the sui juris ritual churches within the Catholic Church.

BTW, there are also particular churches that are not part of an ecclesiastical province -- including the Archdiocese for the Military Services USA and the Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter here in the States and the Archdiocese of Edmonton in Canada. Norm1979 (talk) 21:06, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Norm1979: Good suggestion regarding the ordering, I will amend the request now. The parameter of Metropolitan already exists, but I feel that that would better correspond to the archdiocese rather than the province in itself. Just a thought, though- what would you think? Vesuvio14 (talk) 21:45, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@Vesuvio14:, I think it's best to avoid multiple tags that contain the same information. There's no point in doing things that are repetitive or redundant.  :-) Thus, I prefer a tag that's ecumenical over a tag that's fully equivalent but strictly Roman Catholic. Norm1979 (talk) 21:51, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

So to clarify, that would look like the following:

Addition of: 1-Episcopal Conference (beneath territory), and 2-Ecclesiastical Region (above ecclesiastical province). Is that right? Vesuvio14 (talk) 15:45, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

'headquarters' parameter required?

In the Visual Editor, the "headquarters" parameter is marked as required (with an asterisk) and if I do not fill it in before "applying" changes to an infobox diocese, the VE crashes with a modal dialog. Why/how is this parameter required? I have not encountered it on Roman Catholic diocesan articles, and I wouldn't really know how to fill it in. Please make this parameter optional. Elizium23 (talk) 20:19, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Agreed! It being a required param is frustrating when VE-editing Episcopal diocesan articles too. Ductwork (talk) 01:47, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 26 July 2022

Stop requiring "headquarters" parameter. It is unused in several major use-cases, including Catholic and Anglican. Elizium23 (talk) 01:58, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Think that is governed by the TemplateData section on the /doc page, so it should now be  done, i.e., "suggested" instead of "required" from this edit to the /doc page, which is not protected. So if this change needs to be made in other template documentation, please remember this procedure, because you will likely be able to fix it yourself. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 03:04, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Ah, thanks! Yeah, I didn't really know where that requirement was coming from. I'll keep this in mind! Elizium23 (talk) 03:10, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

my pleasure! Paine  03:17, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 22 June 2022

Please add the parameters to the Location section of this infobox as per discussion above:
1.Episcopal Conference, beneath territory, and
2.Ecclesiastical region, above ecclesiastical province. Thank you! Vesuvio14 (talk) 21:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Please replace all code in {{Infobox diocese}} ← {{Infobox diocese/sandbox}} (diff).

New parameters:

• |episcopal conference=
• |ecclesiastical region=

Test: Template:Infobox diocese/testcases § Tests (Jun 2022)

Below I logged the preparations. -DePiep (talk) 18:15, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Todo: adjust documentation. -DePiep (talk) 18:16, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Preparing

• Preparing in {{Infobox diocese/sandbox}}:

Test: Template:Infobox diocese/testcases § Tests (Jun 2022)

Expect (the new paramters are in sequence):

territory = _1 territory
[[Episcopal conference]] = _2 episcopal conference
[[Ecclesiastical region]] = _3 ecclesiastical region
province =_4 province

New parameters:

• |episcopal conference=
• |ecclesiastical region=

-DePiep (talk) 18:11, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

/sandbox Ready

Y. Sandbox is ready. See testcases and diff. @Vesuvio14:.

-DePiep (talk) 18:11, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

@DePiep: That’s all perfect! Vesuvio14 (talk) 21:46, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: looks like a consensus needs to be established for this alteration. Please garner the needed consensus before using the {{edit template-protected}} template again. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 15:08, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Consensus has been established, see discussion above. Vesuvio14 (talk) 15:13, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I read that, but all I see is some discussion about this with several suggestions, and I cannot discern a consensus for these edits. It appears that more discussion is needed to clarify the need for this edit. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 15:23, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

@Paine Ellsworth: I have re-opened this request on the basis that three months without any ideas to the contrary might constitute a silent consensus. If this is the case, please could the previously discussed changes be implemented? Thank you! Vesuvio14 (talk) 15:27, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Okay, we can see if it continues to "stick". P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 16:56, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Brilliant, thank you so much! Vesuvio14 (talk) 19:00, 4 October 2022 (UTC)