Category talk:Roman Catholic Wikipedians

User page category thingy[edit]

I made one of those neat little category templates for a user page. I made it during play time - for fun. Please check it out: Template:User rc. --Elliskev 02:34, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why are there two separate templates at Template:User rc and at User:MiraLuka/Userboxes/User rc? /blahedo (t) 00:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like someone else made one, too. --Elliskev 17:56, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There's a User:UBX/Catholic, too. Madnefs. /blahedo (t) 20:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since I made one of them, I won't comment on any of them, other than to say that they all look nice. --Elliskev 21:00, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"User rc" (classic Babel style user box) and "User Catholic" (alumni style user box) should be enough. Without objection, I propose deleting the "User RC" template. Perhaps the white-and-gold motif could be incorporated into the "User Catholic" box? I would leave it to User:Mm35173's discretion, but he has not edited anything in almost a month. Anyway, that's my 2¢ — Eoghanacht ^talk 21:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I do plan on changing the color scheme of Template:User rc along with the liturgical seasons (note that it started green and I changed it at the start of Advent, and will change it to white/gold at Christmas, and so on...) --Elliskev 22:17, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That will be great! Keep up the good work! --Hurricane111 23:12, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic Wikipedia activities[edit]

Could there perhaps be a list somewhere of a list of things that Catholic Wikipedians may be particularly interested in?

Some examples:

Adding themselves to Category:Roman Catholic Wikipedians
Helping to Categorise Category:Roman Catholic Church
Participating in The Catholic Encyclopedia missing articles project
Beefing out Category:Roman Catholic Church stubs

JASpencer 21:05, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why not formulate a Wikipedia:WikiProject Roman Catholicism with the goal of developing NPOV articles related to the Catholic Church? (I may participate, but I have not the time to startup the project). — Eoghanacht ^talk 14:39, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has been made. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Catholicism. -- 陈鼎翔贡献 Chat with Tdxiang on IRC! (Tdxiang is down with the flu and will be inactive) 09:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Improper deletion of category[edit]

I found that my user page had been altered (vandalized?) by User:Cydebot by removing Category:Roman Catholic Wikipedians, apparently because this category had been deleted (at least temporarily on June 6, 2006).

The justification for the delete was "Deleting category, CSD C3" which means a speedy delete for a category solely populated by a now-deleted template. For the record: This category started as a manually included user category, which is how I still use it. Even though many are now added to this category through templates, it is not exclusively the case. "CSD C3" does not apply. — Eoghanacht ^talk 13:09, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought roman catholicism considers lies as sins. So stop sinning, Eoghanacht. That wasn't the justification for deleting this category. -- Drini 19:19, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion log * 00:10, 7 June 2006 Drini deleted "Category:Roman Catholic Wikipedians" (category formed via userboxes, disbanded)

Nowhere C3 is mentioned. -- Drini 19:20, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Same here: I never included the template.--Sar e kOfVulcan 17:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Drini, where are you coming from with this "lying" claim? (On your talk page you mention the need to be civil, which I have been). Here are my references:

From the deletion log for this category: "category formed via userboxes, disbanded"
From the history log on my userpage, edit by Cydebot: "Deleting category, CSD C3"
From Speedy Deletion page, criterion Category #3: "Template categories. If a category is solely populated from a template (e.g. Category:Wikipedia cleanup from {{cleanup}}) and the template is deleted per deletion policy, the category can also be deleted without further discussion."

Now technically, the deletion of this category was not as I quoted, but the deletion of the category of my page was (I was not specific as per which deletion I was quoting). Also, are you claiming that "category formed via userboxes, disbanded" means something else besides CFD C3? If so, what was your justification for speedy delete? It was not an empty category, nor a misspelling. — Eoghanacht ^talk 19:36, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok my mistake, we were referring to different things. No I didn't delete this under C3. I delete it because of this kind of usergruping encourages vote stacking and pov pushing. I see the category is up again, I'll leave it as it while I get more support for removing all political/religious user categories. -- Drini 20:18, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly. Still when I was more active I liked these categories because if I wanted a perspective on say a figure in Quaker history I'd know where to contact Quakers at Wikipedia. Not that Quakers(Society of Friends, sorry) would be right, but they might be able to clear up some problems or add new information I wouldn't know. I even created some religious Wikipedian categories along those lines. I created Category:Lutheran Wikipedians just in case they wanted a place, but I created Category:Christian Science Wikipedians specifically because I was working on articles about Christian Scientists.--T. Anthony 03:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Related to user categories, I had 3 or 4 unsolicited requests on my user talk page six or seven months ago that I might consider to be attempts to POV-push or vote stack, but nothing since then. If I remember correctly, the attempts failed. Based on the traffic on my talk page, I honestly do not see it as a real problem. I am part of this category in case someone seeks advice from a user of a certain background to help write quality encyclopedia articles, and because I think there are intangible benefits to offering other editors a snapshot of one's life priorities. — Eoghanacht ^talk 20:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Besides, Catholics come in all stripes: I added the category because I didn't want it to be hijacked by extremists.--Sar e kOfVulcan 18:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is a Roman Catholic?[edit]

Umm...don't you think it odd that lots of Catholics here are labeling themselves by a term invented by Protestants, that is,"Roman Catholic." Should Catholics call themselves, as would the Church, Catholic Wikipedians? Just a helpful point. Tobit2 (talk) 00:34, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just take it as meaning you're of the Roman or Latin rite of Category:Catholic Wikipedians.--T. Anthony (talk) 14:07, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]