Talk:Robert C. Morlino

Controversy sections removed
I have removed some "controversy" sections because their sources cited did not adequately support the material written, with an over-reliance on WP:PRIMARY sources for controversial topics. The "Father Z" section was especially out of place, with one citation to the main landing page of the blog; while more or less truthful, it gave the impression that Morlino and Zuhlsdorf were conspiring to do something wrong. WP:SECONDARY commentary is needed to back up those kinds of things. Elizium23 (talk) 20:29, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Robert C. Morlino. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140201174124/http://www.polishamericanpriestsassociation.org/bulletins/Web%20PAPA%20Fall%202011.pdf to http://www.polishamericanpriestsassociation.org/bulletins/Web%20PAPA%20Fall%202011.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111122064200/http://www.madisondiocese.org/ to http://www.madisondiocese.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:42, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Motto translation
Bishop Morlino's motto 'Visus non mentietur' is currently incorrectly translated in the article as "The eyes do not lie." In fact, the Latin means "The vision shall not lie," a condensation or paraphrase of Habakkuk 2:3. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.104.248.37 (talk) 02:44, 21 August 2018 (UTC)


 * That is also an incorrect translation. Mentietur means disappoint. The vision shall not disappoint. 24.196.92.242 (talk) 21:46, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

"studied at the seminary"
Should 'studied at the seminary' read 'did the novitiate'? That is how Jesuits start, and the rest of his curriculum follows the regular Jesuit order. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 21:16, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

"on the memorial of the Presentation"
Why describe his last days this way? Is it relevant that it was the memorial of the Presention? Why not simply say "On November 23, 2018, the diocese of Madison announced that Morlino had had a "cardiac event" during planned medical testing, 2 days earlier"? Much easier if the date is relevant. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 21:20, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * It is mentioned in the article which we cite. It is extremely relevant because Morlino is a Catholic bishop and lives liturgically, by the General Roman Calendar. Check out any document or statement made by any Catholic bishop, including Pope Francis and they will record the date according to the liturgical feast being celebrated. It is in fact more relevant to Catholics than the civil calendar occasions and commemorations. 2600:8800:1880:188:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 04:05, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I am glad that someone has edited it - successfully - to bring this article more in tune with Wikipedia. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 18:03, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Abuse scandal -- attribution
The analysis of the causes of the sexual abuse scandal are poorly attributed with WP:WEASEL wording. "Some interpreted Morlino..." who? "Conservative Catholics cited studies..." who? What's "conservative"? That's a political label, a divisive one, and a poorly-defined one. The National Catholic Reporter is actually not Catholic, and an extremely poor source to be using here. I suggest that we WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV and define our terms. WHO is interpreting Morlino, WHO is interpreting the studies, let's dispense with labels and let's name some names. And thank you, finally, for adhering to WP:CLAIM and WP:SAY in not using editorial words such as "pointed out". 2600:8800:1880:188:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 04:09, 28 November 2018 (UTC)


 * I agree that as an openly dissident Roman Catholic newspaper, who supports women ordination and artificial contraception, for example, the National Catholic Reporter isn't a very good source. The entry should focus on more Reliable Sources.Mistico (talk) 02:42, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

overlinked
It is not necessary to wikilink as many words in an article as possible. Wikipedia:Avoid using wikilinks--Richardson mcphillips (talk) 23:52, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * wikilinks should be relevant to the topic of the article. A wikilink to the Diocese of Madison, Wisconsin is relevant - links to Madison and Wisconsin are not relevant.  And if you are going to link to Wisconsin, why not also to Madison?  Why not a separate link to the wiki article on Diocese?  Which is more relevant to the article than a link to Wisconsin. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 18:00, 29 December 2018 (UTC)