Talk:List of Catholic dioceses (structured view)

Relationship to Catholic-Hierarchy.org
This page is potentially a violation of the compilation copyright held by Catholic-Hierarchy.org. Argyriou (talk) 00:11, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

You can't copyright the structure of the Catholic church. He says explicitly that he himself is copying off the latest release from the Vatican, which is public domain.

Benkenobi18 03:19, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Agree this info is public domain, the source just gives a back up of where the information can also be found online. On another note, great work. ant_ie 08:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The information, in general, is in the public domain. But if we compile and present it in a similar-enough manner to Catholic-Hierarchy.org, we are possibly violating his copyright. If we compile it in a significantly different way, then we are not. The alphabetical list is generally clear, as alphabetizing is not considered a creative effort. (Though if we broke the large letters in exactly the same places, there might be an issue.)  By combining Central and North America, Benkenobi18 has made a start towards showing that we are not just copying Catholic-Hierarchy.org or the Annuario Pontificio. As this list develops, we should make other changes to distinguish it from the CH.org list. Argyriou (talk) 16:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Isn't Catholic-Hierarchy's information just derived from the Annuario Pontificio? john k 03:30, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I would prefer, though, if we didn't have this material listed as "structured view," which is not intuitive at all, and does seem to be clearly stolen from Catholic-Hierarchy.  BTW, much the same information can also be found at Giga-Catholic Information. john k 03:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * This page caught my eye for that very reason. I suggest a move to List of Roman Catholic dioceses (by conference)), List of Roman Catholic dioceses (by province)), or if you want to be really explicit about the structure.  The intro could also stand to be tweaked considerably.  Alai 15:39, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Mexican provinces
Looking at the page of the Conferencia del Episcopado Mexicano, I see that the provinces are actually sometimes given names distinct from those of their metropolitan archdiocese. Thus, the province of which the Archbishop of Tijuana is Metropolitan is called Baja California, that for León is called  Bajío, that for Tuxtla Gutiérrez Chiapaas, and that for Tulancingo Hidalgo. I'm going to change this, as I assume the official Mexican episcopal conference is a better source than Catholic-Hierarchy. john k 03:59, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes of course. Thanks for taking the time to look these up and change them. I encourage you to propagate any changes you make to these names all the way down the chain, see List of Roman Catholic dioceses in Mexico and the List of Roman Catholic dioceses in North America Benkenobi18 23:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

What the hell?
Ben, you don't have the right to revert other people's contributions without comment. On the issue of the Mexican provinces, in particular, I have an actual source for the use of those names (the Conferencia del Episcopado Mexicano). For the rest, you should at least explain why you disagree before reverting massive amounts of material. john k 21:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * My bad. I do not disagree with your changes, and in fact they have made the page better. Thank you for your time. What happened is that I was editing the North America Page to change the formatting slightly, and copy pasted from one to the other, because they should match. I hadn't realised you had changed the Mexico numbers.

Benkenobi18 21:29, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, cool. Sorry to snap. john k 23:02, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

THANK YOU I LOVE YOU GUYS
HEY GUYS

THANK YOU SO MUCH!

I LOVE THE WORK YOU DID WITH THIS PAGE!!

THANK YOU AND KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. :)

I APOLOGISE FOR THE ACCIDENTAL OVERWRITING, IT WAS NOT MY INTENT TO REVERT. :)

Benkenobi18 21:30, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I would like it to be 'Dioceses of North America and not Dioceses of North America and the Caribbean' I am also going to fix some of the Irish links if I may. :)

Benkenobi18 21:33, 18 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Of course - no problem. Sorry if I reverted any good changes you made without restoring them - I was a bit irked, and figured it'd work itself out.  Anyway, sorry about the misunderstanding.  john k 23:03, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Descriptions
I was just thinking, this page is already over 40 k, and has maybe a quarter of the total dioceses that need to be done. We are looking at around 200kb for the page in it's entirety.

Do we need the descriptions of the individual dioceses (which are on each diocese page), or should we just have the links to each diocese here so that people can find them? I appreciate the work, just I am wondering on whether we have been a bit too ambitious for this page here.

Benkenobi18 23:11, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I dont think one can be too ambitious.ant_ie 19:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * lol Well if page sizes aren't a concern... ;) Benkenobi18 04:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Will be making a rather large upmerge with the other lists tonight. 6 months has greatly improved it. Benkenobi18 (talk) 07:43, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Popeview is now up and running. Benkenobi18 (talk) 11:43, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Military dioceses
In my quick glance, I noticed that the Roman Catholic Archdiocese for the Military Services, USA was not on the list, and neither were other military dioceses and vicarates (unless I missed them). These might be hard to place, as they're not a part of an province, but they're not immediately subject to the Holy See, either. They almost function as personal prelatures within the population of the country. hmmmm. Gentgeen 22:54, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, I have for the moment left out all the dioceses that are 'immediately subject to the Holy See', those will be added once the rest are in. As for the military vicariates, they have also been left out not because I don't want to include them, but because I'm not sure where they would fit. Perhaps a special segment "Military Vicariates?" Oh, and thanks for the correction to the Puerto Rico folks. Benkenobi18 23:35, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Exempt Dioceses
I notice that the exempt dioceses, like the military ones, don't seem to have a place in this article yet, probably because they are often not part of a national conference. I'm thinking in particular of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Stockholm and the Archdiocese of Luxembourg. Sorry I don't have a more constructive comment, but I'd just like to leave this one as a reminder. Rwflammang (talk) 13:17, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reminder. They will be added. List is still a work in progress, but the majority of the full dioceses are on it now. Benkenobi18 (talk) 08:02, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Popeview is now working
With the addition of the chart, this page is now functioning as envisioned 3 years ago. I declare popeview to finally be working. Thanks all of you who continue to update the list to reflect changes in the structure of the Catholic church. Benkenobi18 (talk) 06:56, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Nordic Dioceses
Love the article, the work you did to make this is incredible. I couldn't find the Scandinavian dioceses of Diocese of Copenhagen, Diocese of Helsinki, Diocese of Oslo, Diocese of Reykjavík, Diocese of Stockholm so I added them on to the main list, as they are the Episcopal Conference of Scandinavia, but as there isn't an archdiocese, they are immediately subject to the Holy See, which means they could be put on to that list instead. What do you think? Perhaps added to the Directly subject to the Holy See section but grouped together as part of their episcopal conference? Pjposullivan (talk) 17:48, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Also, reading the article on Holy Synod of Catholic Bishops of Greece, the Archdiocese of Athens is a member of that episcopal conference, but is immediately subject to the Holy See, so is included on that list, but it is just like the Archdiocese of Hobart - which is included in the Australian episcopal conference. What about putting those places that are part of episcopal conferences but are subject to the Holy See on to the main list, but have asterisks beside them? Just a thought.Pjposullivan (talk) 18:12, 7 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Nordic dioceses have their own bin in Europe. Check again, they should be there. Benkenobi18 (talk) 03:44, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Peculiar structure
Not sure why all dioceses have to be listed.

But given that, why are European and other archdioceses structured differently than other dioceses? An archdiocese = a diocese as far as structure goes. It is treated that way in the United States, for example. But "suffragan" dioceses are indented under European dioceses. This is wrong. Metropolitans oversee their Metropoli. Agree that they are almost always archbishops. See http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cbishops/documents/rc_con_cbishops_doc_20040222_apostolorum-successores_en.html as basis that all archdioceses are the same whether in US or abroad. Student7 (talk) 00:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually an archdiocese is simply that of an archbishop, a higher rank then bishop, but both perform the same episcopal functions in their (arch)bishopric. In most cases (excepting titular sees), an archbishop is also the metropolitan of a province, usually named after his see (the metropolis), which also includes the dioceses of one or generally more suffragan bishops; the sees which constitute exception to that rule are specifically termed 'exempt' (from provincial incorporation). There is no pressing reason to treat the US differently -against canon law logic- in this matter, nor Europe, with the possible exception of Italy, which has an unlikely concentration of generally tiny (arch)dioceses, so as to make the Mexican army of (arch)bishops there, not unlike Anglican prelates and some Orthodox churches, almost the formally over-rated equivalent of curates and deans within a typical diocese.
 * I think that User:Fastifex's comments above pertaining to Italy ought to be somewhere with an WP:RS. Maybe under Catholic Church history, since archbishops were more likely to become cardinal-electors in the old days with the concurrent likelihood of an Italian Pope. Student7 (talk) 22:13, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 6 November 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: Not moved (non-admin closure) — Andy W. ( talk ) 19:11, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

List of Catholic dioceses (structured view) → List of Catholic dioceses – Per WP:Consistency and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism. So as to have one list without brackets, I suppose would be more convenient, wouldn't it? Chicbyaccident (talk) 14:14, 6 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Oppose: unclear how the proposed move is supported by WP:Consistency and furthermore I can't find any discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism relating to this move (a link to the relevant section would have been helpful). Moreover the use of the disambiguator '(structured view)' is clearly to distinguish this article from List of Catholic dioceses (alphabetical) which is where List of Catholic dioceses currently redirects and which has just as much a claim to this main title as this page. Ebonelm (talk) 23:14, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Still opposed: List of Catholic dioceses is currently a redirect to List of Catholic dioceses (alphabetical) I don't see how it would be more 'convenient' to make the structured view version (which is by far the more complicated) the WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. Ebonelm (talk) 13:27, 8 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Oppose: not sure what you are trying to accomplish here. Elizium23 (talk) 23:18, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry. Modified. Chicbyaccident (talk) 02:22, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Currently, we have two lists. Are you proposing that the other list (alphabetical order) be deleted? Elizium23 (talk) 03:00, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
 * No, but that one with brackets would be enough. Supposedly this one thus without. Not sure if there is any consensus for these matters, though? Chicbyaccident (talk) 05:34, 8 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Strong Oppose. As page creator. Benkenobi18 (talk) 06:05, 10 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.

East Europe vs West Europe
As the definition of East European Provinces states: countries on the west side of the iron courtain with catholic majority, while the definition for the East Europe: countries on the east side of the courtain with orthodox or muslim majority. Taking these definitions from the article into account, how is it possible to put Slovenia and Croatia to East Europe? Both were west of Iron courtain and both have (Slovenia to a lesser ectent) catholic majorities. Hint about Iron courtain: Former Yugoslavia was not part of the East block.89.164.235.128 (talk) 22:12, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Merge proposal with alphabetical view List of Catholic dioceses (alphabetical)
Per consistency with how the two equivalent different lists where merged into List of Catholic titular sees (see: Talk:List of Catholic titular sees) per WP:CONCISE, also probably this article should be merged with List of Catholic dioceses (alphabetical). Chicbyaccident (talk) 10:31, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Speltdecca (talk) 00:47, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The two do very different things. This looks at how the dioceses are structured. Benkenobi18 (talk) 07:50, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Category:Exempt Catholic ordinariates?
Would this be motivated, as subcategory to Category:Holy See? PPEMES (talk) 13:38, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * There is already a Category:Ordinariates for Eastern Catholic faithful, is this what you mean? It is a sub of Category:Eastern Catholic dioceses, and should probably stay that way. The exempt status is not really defining, and these jurisdictions should anyway be somewhere inside Category:Catholic dioceses. Also, other dioceses are generally not categorized by their parent ecclesiastical province, so there would be little reason to parent exempt jurisdictions to Category:Holy See. Place Clichy (talk) 17:47, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
 * OK. PPEMES (talk) 18:07, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Order of countries
Is there a particular reason european countries are ordered the way they are? And if not, is reordering them allowed? 77.205.142.240 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:27, 30 September 2022 (UTC)


 * It seems that they are alphabetized within Western Europe and then followed by an alphabetized Eastern Europe; the division there would be somewhat up for debate; how would you propose to order them? Elizium23 (talk) 23:43, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Unserious answer: it's tempting to reorder them accordingly to the traditional provinciale romance order of medieval lists*
 * Serious answer: a wholly alphabetical list would make more sense, as a cold-war era east/west split isn't clearly relevant here.
 * Roughly italy (lazio then south to north), slovenia, croazia, serbia and albania then the rest of the balkans, then hungary, slovakia, romania, poland (probably ukraine and lithuania around there), czechia, germany, netherlands, belgium, latvia, Austria, Switzerland, france, spain, england, scandinavia, scotland, ireland. Other countries inserted as fits77.205.153.226 (talk)
 * 77.205.153.226 (talk) 21:49, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Rhyme or reason to the order?
Is there a rhyme or reason to the order of this list? As noted above, it seems that the European countries are ordered alphabetically, but on an East/West cold war split. The continents are neither alphabetical, nor something like a "historical order" (which would place Asia first, then Africa, then Europe...by Christianity spreading there). Is there a reason the whole thing isn't just alphabetical? It seems like it was designed to list (Western) Europe and North America as the "most important" territories for an arbitrary reason, which is of course a POV presentation. Seltaeb Eht (talk) 19:18, 19 February 2024 (UTC)