Talk:Anglican Diocese of Manchester

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Anglican Diocese of Birmingham - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 21:41, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 December 2023[edit]

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. No supporting comments, will re-open as a multiple move request including other dioceses metioned in discussion (non-admin closure) A.D.Hope (talk) 13:40, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anglican Diocese of Manchester → Diocese of Manchester (United Kingdom) – The article's current name disambiguates it from the Roman Catholic Diocese of Manchester, which is located in New Hampshire, USA. My concern is that the current title implies that there is a Roman Catholic diocese of Manchester in the UK, when in reality the diocese of Salford covers the city. Disambiguating by location rather than Christian denomination makes it clearer that only one UK diocese is named after Manchester.

I've opted for 'Manchester (United Kingdom)' over 'Manchester, United Kingdom' as although the name of the diocese includes 'Manchester' it's an organisation rather than a place name. A.D.Hope (talk) 13:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 23:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – I'd prefer "England" as it is the Church of England, plus shorter. But neutral overall, as the current is WP:NATURALDAB. DankJae 23:43, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Either "England" or "United Kingdom" works, and I can't say I have a very strong preference either way. A.D.Hope (talk) 00:04, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Inconsistent with other articles in the same categories, and natural disambiguation is preferred. I'm inclined to think that Diocese of Westminster (Church of England) should be moved to Anglican Diocese of Westminster to fit with all the other dioceses. If this page is moved to a parenthetical disambiguator, it should be moved to Diocese of Manchester (Church of England) so that it is at least consistent with one other article. Celia Homeford (talk) 11:56, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I believe three other dioceses fall into the same category as Manchester, that is having the same name as a diocese in another country, and in each case I'd support disambiguation by country rather than denomination:
    • Diocese of Worcester (United Kingdom)
    • Diocese of Peterborough (United Kingdom)
    • Diocese of Birmingham (United Kingdom)
    The reason I didn't open four move requests at once is that it can be unhelpful, but consistency is the eventual goal. A.D.Hope (talk) 12:36, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose, I guess oppose as proposed, if there are other articles, best propose them together for wider consistency and make a larger discussion on how to disambiguate these dioceses. They are complex, so does need sorting out. DankJae 13:26, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Given no 'support' comments have been made I'll withdraw this request and re-open it including the other three dioceses. A.D.Hope (talk) 13:37, 5 January 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.

Requested move 5 January 2024[edit]

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Clear consensus that the current natural disambiguation is more appropriate (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 20:44, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The rationale for these moves is the same as that given in the request above, but expanded to include the articles of all Church of England dioceses in the same position. The current names of these articles disambiguate them from dioceses in other countries, namely the:

The current titles imply that there are dioceses of other denominations based in these three English cities, when in reality only the Church of England dioceses are based there. Disambiguating by location rather than Christian denomination makes this clearer. It should be contrasted with, for example, Anglican Diocese of Southwark and Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Southwark, where two dioceses of different denominations names are named after the same district.

I'm ambivalent as to whether the disambiguation should be to (United Kingdom) or (England); either works. A.D.Hope (talk) 13:56, 5 January 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 04:41, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note – the Diocese of Birmingham is mentioned in the earlier discussion, but as it disambiguates from the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Birmingham, also based in the English city, as well as the Roman Catholic diocese in Alabama I haven't included it. A.D.Hope (talk) 14:03, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject England has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:06, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Greater Manchester has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:08, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Christianity has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:09, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I'm not sure whether I agree they should be moved or not, but if they are then it should be to Diocese of Foo (Church of England). And the North American ones should be moved too for absolute unambiguity. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:49, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Moving to 'Diocese of Manchester (Church of England)' would still imply that there are other dioceses named 'Diocese of Manchester' in Manchester, UK, which isn't the case. Disambiguating by location rather than denomination solves this problem.
    As I understand it there's a convention that Roman Catholic diocese articles are titled 'Roman Catholic diocese of...' even when disambiguation by denomination isn't needed. This move request can't address that convention. A.D.Hope (talk) 13:59, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This about church structure, not geography. And churches define their dioceses by name. Where names overlap, the usual disambiguation is "Anglican", e.g. Anglican Diocese of Liverpool vs. Roman Catholic Diocese of Liverpool. Unless the same church uses the same diocesal name more than once, geographic disambiguation is unnecessary. Walrasiad (talk) 11:45, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Anglican Diocese of Liverpool and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Liverpool are both based in Liverpool, UK, so disambiguation by denomination is appropriate. Conversely, the Anglican Diocese of Manchester is located in Manchester, UK and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Manchester is located in Manchester, New Hampshire. This makes geographic disambiguation more appropriate, as we are disambiguating two dioceses with the same name in different cities, not two dioceses with the same name located in the same city. A.D.Hope (talk) 12:00, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why does geography matter? It seems denominational difference is of greater importance. Walrasiad (talk) 18:02, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Geography is more important in these instances, as the dioceses are not located in the same city. The current disambiguation doesn't make this clear. A.D.Hope (talk) 18:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am afraid I don't agree. These are church structures. Denomination is the important distinguisher. Geography is not relevant. This is not about the geographic location of a church, it is about a unit in church hierarchy. There's only one Roman Catholic Diocese of Manchester, and there's only one Anglican Diocese of Manchester. If there was a Catholic Diocese in Manchester (UK), then it would need the geographical distinction. But until then, it doesn't. Walrasiad (talk) 18:27, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dioceses are geographic church structures. There's only one diocese in Manchester, UK, and only one diocese in Manchester, USA, so the denomination doesn't need to be specified but the location does. A.D.Hope (talk) 18:31, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dioceses are units of a church hierarchy. They have geographic jurisdictions, but it is not confined to a town stated in the title, e.g. the Bishop of Ely is the bishop of Cambridgeshire and spends most of his time in Cambridge. But it is still called the "Diocese of Ely". In the Anglican hierarchy, there's only one Diocese of Manchester. In the Catholic hierarchy, there's only one Diocese of Manchester. By the way, there is a Catholic Diocese in Manchester UK, it is called the "Roman Catholic Diocese of Salford". And there is an Anglican diocese in New Hampshire, called Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire. They cover the same geography.
To put in more clearly: there are two dioceses in Manchester UK: the Anglican "Diocese of Manchester" and the Catholic "Diocese of Salford". And there are two dioceses in Manchester, USA: the Anglican "Diocese of New Hampshire" and the Catholic "Diocese of Manchester". Walrasiad (talk) 18:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For Wikipedia's purposes both of your examples are already disambiguated, as although those dioceses serve similar areas they have different names.
The dioceses I've listed in the move request share a name with another diocese, but not a location. In my opinion it therefore makes more sense to disambiguate by location than by denomination, as the former is the main distinguishing factor. The current titles could imply, for example, that there is a Roman Catholic Diocese of Peterborough in the UK, when there isn't. A.D.Hope (talk) 19:40, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am afraid I have to disagree. Dioceses are proper names, not geographical descriptions. We also don't specify "London, Ontario" in the title of London International Airport or the London Children's Museum, which are also proper names. There are dioceses named after murky things, misleading locations (e.g. Diocese of Caledonia), and many simply exist on paper (List of Catholic titular sees). Every Catholic diocese article already starts with "Roman Catholic diocese of....", and Anglican diocese articles, when disambiguation is needed, start with "Anglican diocese of ...". Disambiguation by denomination is the right way to go, and sufficient. A hatnote can be added if needed. Walrasiad (talk) 03:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The proposal uses parenthetical disambiguation (see WP:NCDAB), e.g. "Diocese of Peterborough (United Kingdom)", so it is clear that the disambiguation doesn't form part of the name of the diocese. It also helps to make it clearer that the disambiguation is with a diocese of the same name in a different country, not with a diocese of the same name in the same city; there is no other UK diocese named after Peterborough.
I'm sorry, but I don't really see what dioceses named after 'murky things' or Catholic titular sees have to do with this specific move request. A.D.Hope (talk) 10:09, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The point is that the geography is often irrelevant. These are proper names as assigned and used by the church hierarchy. The natural way to disambiguate would be by denomination, not country. Walrasiad (talk) 13:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate you for engaging in discussion, and I'm increasingly conscious that it's not my role to persuade you to change your opinion. We've both laid out our case in a way which should be helpful to the closing editor, so shall we leave it here? A.D.Hope (talk) 14:21, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Not immediately seeing why one would imply there's a Roman Catholic Diocese of Manchester. Is it the hatnote that's making the implication? If it is, then there's a case for the hatnote's removal. I don't see an obvious need for it anyway. It's not on the Peterborough article. Rupples (talk) 20:25, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The convention on Wikipedia is disambiguate two dioceses with the same or similar names in the same city by their denomination, e.g. the Anglican Diocese of Birmingham and the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Birmingham and the Anglican Diocese of Portsmouth and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portsmouth. The existence of Anglican Diocese of Manchester could therefore imply the existence of a Roman Catholic diocese to someone familiar with that convention (the actual RC diocese covering Manchester is Salford). A.D.Hope (talk) 20:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Similarly, is there a problem with implying an Anglican diocese from Roman Catholic Diocese of Northampton? Rupples (talk) 21:23, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Personally I don't think disambiguation is needed, but there's a fairly strong convention of using 'Roman Catholic Diocese of [Name]' even when a diocese doesn't need disambiguating. Discussing that is really beyond the scope of this move request. A.D.Hope (talk) 21:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    On a related note, where two RC dioceses have the same name they seem to be disambig'd by location, e.g. the Roman Catholic Diocese of Toledo and Roman Catholic Diocese of Toledo, Brazil, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Victoria in Texas and Roman Catholic Diocese of Victoria in Canada. In some cases I think "...in [Place]" is part of the formal name and therefore WP:NATURAL, but similar parenthetical disambiguation could work for Anglican dioceses.
    Alternatively, given RC dioceses are always disambiguated by denomination it could be argued that Anglican dioceses don't need to be disambiguated at all, but that raises WP:PRIMARYTOPIC questions. (Bet you're glad you gave an opinion, eh?) A.D.Hope (talk) 20:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Not convinced the change is necessary. The case for the article renaming seems to rest on an assumption The current titles imply . . . readers/editors will be led to believe a Catholic diocese exists with the same name as the Anglican diocese for the above named places. I question this because it doesn't seem obvious this is so. Also, the renaming would lead to inconsistent article titles. Rupples (talk) 23:04, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The underlying justification is that these are ultimately geographic disambiguations rather than denominational ones, but I've been through that above so I won't bore you. A.D.Hope (talk) 23:32, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Looked into this further and finally see what you're getting at. I thought that because all the Roman Catholic diocese had "Roman Catholic" in their page titles that it naturally followed that all the Anglican diocese had "Anglican" in their titles; the only Anglican ones I'd looked at were the three examples in the nomination! I now see this not to be the case; a predominance is given to the Anglicans as the primary topic for the diosese. I'll take a renewed look shortly. Rupples (talk) 03:46, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Upon further consideration, while I now see a logic to the proposal, I still believe the change unnecessary and of little, if any benefit. The page titles are already disambiguated and the relevant disambiguation pages are better presented as they are now (with the denominations the first word in the title for both articles e.g. Diocese of Manchester) than would be the case if the proposed move went ahead. Rupples (talk) 12:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Keep It Simple Stupid. The proposal appears to be that this new naming convention should apply to Anglican Dioceses where there is no corresponding RC diocese of the same name. This is unnecessarily complicating matters, the titles of Anglican diocese varying for reasons which have nothing to do with the C of E. Also, what about the Greek Orthodox church and other churches which may have bishops in Britain? PatGallacher (talk) 20:28, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The proposal isn't inherently linked to Roman Catholic dioceses. However, I believe the Church of England and Roman Catholic Church are the only major denominations which divide England into dioceses, so the article about their dioceses are the most likely to need disambiguating from each other.
    As far as I'm aware the various Eastern Orthodox churches have single dioceses which cover Great Britain, for example the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Thyateira and Great Britain, the Serbian Orthodox Eparchy of Britain and Scandinavia, and the Russian Orthodox Diocese of Great Britain and Western Europe. A.D.Hope (talk) 22:10, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Looking at the article on the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese, they could have a diocese in Birmingham. You also have the Lutherans, although looking at their articles they may not have bishops in Britain. This is the completely unnecessary investigation which we would have to get into if we abandon the present straightforward titles. PatGallacher (talk) 22:21, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Anglican Diocese of Birmingham isn’t part of this move request, in part because Roman Catholic Diocese of Birmingham exists. It’s really just a question of checking the disambiguation page. A.D.Hope (talk) 00:58, 20 January 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anglican_Diocese_of_Manchester&oldid=1204867765"