Talk:Richard Gagnon

Linking of the word bishop, infobox caption, and the infobox's church field
Having been reverted by, I want to bring the matter to the talk page for discussion.

Firstly, the article uses the phrase "bishop of the Catholic Church". As the word bishop is a separate link, when I first clicked it, I assumed I would be directed to an article about bishops generally; however, I was linked to the article Bishop in the Catholic Church. In line with the principle of least astonishment, I changed it to use one link for the whole phrase (i.e., "bishop of the Catholic Church"). This is in accordance with MOS:LINKCLARITY which provides:

That being the case, I am wondering what 's objection is. If "bishop of the Catholic Church" (linking to the general article about bishops) would be preferred for some reason, I would be amenable, but I do not see how the existing revision conforms to the MOS.

Secondly, the caption of the primary image in the infobox currently reads "Gagnon in 2002, when he was a parish priest in Vancouver." I removed the period to conform to MOS:CAPTION which provides: "Most captions are not complete sentences but merely sentence fragments which should not end with a period." I'm not clear as to why wishes to retain the period.

Lastly, the infobox currently lists the subject's denomination as "Roman Catholic" and his church as "Roman Catholic Church". I suspect is already familiar, but for those who aren't, in official usage, the term Roman Catholic Church refers to the entirety of the church in communion with the See of Rome. That is to say the term is inclusive of the Roman Catholic Church's 24 autonomous particular churches sui iuris (the Latin Church and the 23 Eastern Catholic churches).

Given that the denomination field already indicates the subject's Roman Catholicism, I included "Latin Church" in the church field. The inclusion of the relevant autonomous particular church sui iuris in that field is a common practice. A survey of the articles for the senior bishop in each of the 23 Eastern Catholic churches, for example, shows that they uniformly include the name of the autonomous particular church. As before, I'm not sure what takes issue with there.

, could you please clarify? Thanks, 142.161.113.242 (talk) 03:22, 25 June 2021 (UTC)


 * This article went through a [|thorough GAN review] just over a year ago, which also checked that it was in compliance with MOS. MOS:OVERLINK only says "religions (e.g., Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism)" generally should not be linked, and the Catholic Church is a denomination of Christianity.  I see no reason why the lead should not link the religious denomination that the subject belongs to (given that is the only part of the article prose that links this).  Also, I don't see how "the inclusion of the relevant autonomous particular church sui iuris in that field is a common practice".  I know of no other article of a bishop that is at featured or good article status that uses the terminology "Latin Church".  If you do have an example of FAs or GAs that use such terminology, please cite them.  I have no inclination of having this good article de-listed because some IP thinks their personal taste should overrule consensus. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:31, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * This article went through a [|thorough GAN review] just over a year ago, which also checked that it was in compliance with MOS. That's not true. The good article criteria only require compliance with the MOS "for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation". WP:GAN explicitly states, "Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style or its subpages is not required for good articles."
 * MOS:OVERLINK only says "religions (e.g., Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism)" generally should not be linked, and the Catholic Church is a denomination of Christianity. I'm not clear as to WP:OVERLINK's relevance here. No one is suggesting that there is overlinking nor that we can't link to Catholic Church. As you'll recall, I even suggested "bishop of the Catholic Church" as an alternative to my original proposal. Could you clarify what it is you mean? And regarding the existing text in the lead, how do you reconcile the use of "bishop of the Catholic Church" with MOS:LINKCLARITY?
 * I know of no other article of a bishop that is at featured or good article status that uses the terminology "Latin Church". If you do have an example of FAs or GAs that use such terminology, please cite them. I'm speaking to whether the name of the relevant autonomous particular church sui iuris is used in the church field rather than whether the term Latin Church is used. Do you view the rationale for not including the name of the autonomous particular church in that field of the infobox for Latin bishops as being distinct from the case of other Roman Catholic bishops? As to examples, while I should note that the scope of our enquiry should not be limited to FAs and GAs, I would point to Elias Zoghby and Gregorio Pietro Agagianian as examples of GAs that name the relevant autonomous particular church.
 * Regarding the second point of my initial comment, I'm wondering if you could shed some light on your desire to include a period in the caption of the primary image in the infobox.
 * I have no inclination of having this good article de-listed because some IP thinks their personal taste should overrule consensus. So, a few things here: Firstly, what about what I wrote could possibly lead to the article losing good article status? Which of the six good article criteria do you think my concerns pertain to? Secondly, arguments of the class referred to on the page to which you linked – – "make no use of policies, guidelines, or even logic." I've already pointed out multiple guidelines to which the article does not appear to conform and I certainly hope you're not suggesting that I am failing to employ any logic here. Thirdly, I'm not sure of what relevance my being unregistered is here. And finally, what leads you to believe that consensus is being "overruled"? To the contrary, this talk page is a forum by which consensus is generated. 142.161.113.242 (talk) 06:02, 26 June 2021 (UTC)