Talk:Archbishop of Armagh/Archive 1

Plain name as which archbishop or disambig page?

 * Hi there. I'm giving you notice that I reversed a move you made to Archbishop of Armagh from the uncontroversial section of WP:RM. This is actually controversial ... at least because of my objection. Before the English reformation there is only one archbishop of Armagh, probably more important than both modern archbishoprics, while abbots of Armagh are also there (the senior dark age title, "successor of St Patrick", shifted from the abbot to archbishop only later). As the Anglicans split and this is a minority religion in the country, it would be bizarre to dab the page for that reason alone. So there's nothing uncontroversial about it. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 09:51, 30 December 2008 (UTC) ("You" = User:Anthony Appleyard)
 * I disgree with Deacon of Pndapetzim. There are currently two archbishops of Armagh; one Roman Catholic and the other Church of Ireland. They are both the head of their denomination in Ireland. There is no problem with Archbishop of Dublin being the disambig page which links to either the R.C. of C. of I. ones. Wikipedia is supposed to be impartial, but don't feel this being done on this issue. Scrivener-uki (talk) 18:10, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I would't cite Dublin as a great example. It is a strongly Anglican area, and of course doesn't have an Abbot of Dublin article redirecting to it. That said, it also duplicates content (of the pre-Ref bishops) and probably the same arrangement should take place, the Catholic article occupying the current dab page (it shouldn't be necessary, but apparently is, to point out that the archbishops before the reformation are Catholic, Anglicanism not existing until that point). Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 18:16, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with Deacon of Pndapetzim about duplicating the pre-Ref bishops. The Irish pre- and post-Ref R.C. bishops should only be listed in R.C. articles. The C of I Bps should only listed from the Reformation and not with a mixture of both.
 * To reply to Deacon of Pndapetzim's comment about Dublin being a strongly Anglican area. Dublin is the capital city of the predominantly Roman Catholic Republic of Ireland. Armagh is a small city in predominantly Protestant Northern Ireland.
 * I don't want to be biased with either religion. I'd just prefer to see that if someone types Archbishop of Armagh, they'll find a disambig page with a choice of the RC one or the C of I one. Scrivener-uki (talk) 19:22, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Regarding Dublin. Dublin was the heart of New English (and hence Anglican) Ireland [and was the heart of protestant Ireland until relatively recent demographic changes], and while Armagh is in the predominantly protestant north, Anglican protestantism is still relatively minor there. BTW, in case you're worried, I promise that the wish to avoid using this page as a dab page has nothing to do with apostolic preference on my part, just that it makes more historic and practical sense. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 20:32, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

It does not make more "historic and practical" sense - that is your POV, not a fact. A better case can be made for Bishop of Raphoe, but here in fact, more pages link to the Church of Ireland Archbishop than the Roman Catholic one. This really should have been discussed back in April. This should be the DAB page as there are TWO archbishops both with claims to the title that are legal under the law. I am resoring this until a consensus emerges. -- Secisek (talk) 21:20, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Controversial
Deacon of Pndapetzim move of Archbishop of Armagh (Roman Catholic) to this page last year was a controversial one done without discussion. I have, in some mannner, restored the pages as they were, pending further discusion. -- Secisek (talk) 14:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but WP:CUTPASTE takes precedence. It causes a problem with WP:GFDL which trumps your (very) late claim of a controversial move.  WP:RM and/or WP:DR please.  When this is resolved, proceed to WP:RFPP for unprotection.  Thank you.  —Wknight94 (talk) 14:25, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It would seem that Wikipedia gives precedence to the current Roman Catholic Abp over current the Church of Ireland Abp. Scrivener-uki (talk) 20:23, 2 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Having a disambiguation page for just two items should really be the last resort. In this case it doesn't seem to be necessary. One of the items is older, significantly so. Leaving the older item at X and having a headnote to point to the newer X’ seems reasonable enough. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:55, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

That is the rub, tho: which item is older? Both men are Primates of Ireland, both men sit in the cathedra of St Patrick, both men trace their succession back to the ancient Christian Church that rose out of the Celtic mists of Pre-history. To call one older than the other is a metter of judgement and indeed, for some, faith. Neither of which is an ideal arbiter here. No longer taking action, but giving my two cents. -- Secisek (talk) 23:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

It's strange that the Archdiocese of Armagh links to either the RC or C-of-I ones with no problem, but not for the Archbishop of Armagh. There's no problem with Archbishop of Dublin or Bishop of Clogher linking to each RC or C-of-I ones. Same with Diocese of Derry or Diocese of Clogher, no problem with them either denomination. In fact all the RC Archdioceses and dioceses start with "Roman Catholic Archdiocese of XXXX" or "Roman Catholic Diocese of XXXX". But with the Archbishop of Armagh it doesn't follow the pattern. It is a biased POV. Scrivener-uki (talk) 23:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not very organized on this. I wouldn't draw too many conclusions from that, we builders - all of us - have to make up the rules as we go along. I was planning to sort all that disorganization later this year by completing lists for all the different dioceses in Ireland. It's not actually that big a deal though. Generally the Irish dioceses have often gotten merged so naming conflict isn't that bad, just a handful. It's part of the problem of the medieval Irish church not being well served on wikipedia ... compare how many archbishops of a great see like Armagh have articles (and lo the quality) compated with Canterbury or ... erm ... Dunblane. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 23:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Heh. The only reason the ABCs are in any sort of shape is that I took them in hand a year and a half ago. Better comparison would be compare Archbishop of Dublin to Archbishop of Rouen or Archbishop of Paris. Dublin would actually be easier, since they are covered by the Handbook of British Chronology and, presumably, the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. I'm very interested in a decision on how to deal with naming and listing the Irish episcopate, as eventually I'll probably turn to them to get them up to snuff, and I'd rather avoid too many mistakes in naming when I get started on them. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:54, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I think all the Irish bishoprics are in the Handbook of British Chronology, and all Irish people in principle are covered by the ODNB (Remarkable people in any walk of life who were connected with the British Isles). I don't think publishers based in England ever quite got around to recognizing the Republic of Ireland ... good thing for wikipedia's history articles though! Shame they don't extend it to France. Anyway, does Ealgyth have any suggestions about this problem?
 * To summarise, the reasons I believe the current set-up is best is:
 * English wikipedia organizes based on denomination (German wiki doesn't always, split bishops lists often go in the same article)
 * As no bishop before the reign of Henry VIII could in theory be Anglican, irrespective of apostolic claims made by any church, pre-Henrican bishops are not Anglican and can't accurately be on Anglican lists
 * Therefore, although modern Catholic bishops can be merged with historic ones (both being Catholic), Anglican bishops can't be merged with the latter
 * The historic bishops are ancestral to modern episcopal establishments in Ireland, both Catholic bishops and Anglican
 * Historic lists have precedence to a title because medieval bishops were of importance then, but are only of marginal importance in modern civilization
 * Catholicism in Ireland is the religion of the vast majority. Roughly half of protestants on the island of Ireland are Presbyterians (who, like the Scots, have no bishops) not Anglicans. 380,000 versus 4.3 million, Anglicans versus Catholics.


 * All this leads me to believe that when there is a clash in title between a historic & Catholic bishopric and a modern Anglican one, the historic bishopric should be preferred rather than dabbing both. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 10:08, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, the only thing this Yank will add to the above is that the HBC cheats. They list the bishops of Ireland in three sets of lists. One set of lists to 1534. Then a CoI set of lists from 1534. Then a Catholic set of lists from 1534. Otherwise, the only question I have is what do our other articles on Irish bishoprics do? Ealdgyth - Talk 14:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The ones I haven't edited extensively tend to use duplicate the lists, but there are very lists on wiki atm. One thought is, instead of having the common name as a dab page (which creates problems for readers, as Angus will say), keep the historic bishops on the dab page and split them off into two articles after the Reformation. This is might look odd for the Catholic lists, which there's no reason to split, but as the opposition here would be coming from aggrieved Anglicans, it would alleviate that. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 15:07, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Rather than have two articles, this article and Archbishop of Armagh (Church of Ireland), there could be just one article. This page could start off with about how the title was created, then about how there came about with two abps in the Reformation, and finish about the two abps today. It'd imagine the page would be rather long to include with lists of abps, instead have a separate page titled List of Archbishops of Armagh with the pre-Reformation abps and then post-Reformation abps of the C-of-I and RC successions. Take a look at Bishop of Kildare to give an idea with this page. Would that be acceptable with everyone? Scrivener-uki (talk) 04:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)