Talk:Ranuccio Scotti Douglas

Copyright violation ?
The list of consecrations and co-consecrations is of little value for the biography of the subject of the article. It was, as the citation admits, taken from a self-published web page belonging to David M. Cheney. That it has a reference to the fact does not protect the copied list from the charge of copyright violation.

--Vicedomino (talk) 04:34, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) A list that is based on facts and arranged chronologically does not pose any copyright issues; 2) David Cheney has given his express permission to use his website; and 3) co-consecrators are not trivia as their act of consecration is every bit as valid as that of the principal consecrator. Patapsco913 (talk) 15:15, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Episcopal succession
The lists of whom Ranuccio Scotti Douglas was the principal consecrator and principal co-consecrator have been recommended to be moved to another article, pseudo-redirected, or removed. Whilst this is of no particular interest to me, it is still a remarkable part of the bishop's life. This could be summarized numerically, but the loss of names connected with the bishop would be, in my view, a retrograde step. Perhaps the solution is to provide the list as a list elewhere, or as a category? Shipsview (talk) 18:21, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree, the ordination of new bishops is one of the key duties of a bishop and so important that the church thoroughly documents who participated. We have some bishops which we know very little about but we know who they consecrated so the church must have felt that it was very important. The wikilinks to Consecrator give the information context. I would not deem it trivial. That said, there could be an argument for moving the list to a separate page or creating a drop-down (see Scipione Rebiba under ordination history in the infobox). But given that this biography is not very large, it does not seem to warrant a switch to a new page. Patapsco913 (talk) 19:21, 14 January 2020 (UTC)