Talk:Pope (disambiguation)

Notes

Am changing Roman Catholic to Catholic, as there are other Rites of the Catholic church, and the Pope heads them all. The Roman is merely the biggest (I always use, and have in many places on wikipedia, the example of calling the USSR "Russia".) Unfortunately, the only good article on the Catholic church as a whole is under Roman Catholic Church, which incorrectly states that the term RCC includes the Eastern Rite Catholic churches, so I am leaving the link as is. At some point, I need to figure out how to fix this, but as I am new, and it would involve a lot of page moving, etc on major topics, I am loathe to do it without really thinking through before hand how best to propose it. --John Kenneth Fisher 13:41, May 15, 2005 (UTC)

Wrong. This is not about rites. We call them Roman Catholics to differenciate them from the Orthodox Catholics. --Againme (talk) 18:44, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I will remove the reference to a "Discordian pope". I know, the "discordian religion" this is a popular joke in Wikipedia, but I am deeply convinced that it is a mistake to spread this joke to the "real" Wikipedia pages. PFG

Added it back. Religious bias and false dichotomies between the "sacred" and the "frivolous" have no place on Wikipedia. (Should we delete all the articles on Zen next?) "Pope" also should redirect here, not to the article on the Catholic Pope.68.9.202.192 (talk) 16:53, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Some interesting material was recently added by Ghaly concerning the history and acceptance of the title as applied to a particular office of the Orthodox; however as can be seen in, eg, Greek Orthodox Church of Alexandria, delving here into the old and conflicting claims regarding the succession to the Episcopate of Alexandria seems to serve more to ambiguate than to disambiguate. This material is perhaps better at Patriarch of Alexandria? Please comment, wiser heads. User:scbomber 09:09, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

It seems relevant to both pages, and so I agree with Ghaly on this one. (Ghaly's response can be found here.) (unsigned comment appears to be by Troy 07)

Continuing this discussion, I should have been clearer in what I was pointing out. Disambiguation pages generally all take a similar form, based on the Manual of Style. They are not even really considered articles themselves, but a sort of signpost to direct people to the relevant content articles. I believe the new material does not serve that purpose in its present form. I also have concerns about neutral point of view with the prescriptive value judgments that appear to be implied by statements such as "Abba is the most powerful designation, that for all Monks in the East to volanterily follow his spiritual authority, it should be assumed he was a bearer of Christ." I'm asking WikiProject Religion folks to look in here and give their ideas. Also, please sign your comments with four tildes (~). Thanks! User:scbomber 10:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

(copied from User_talk:scbomber)

• Please feel free to do the edits that you think is needed and I will try to do my edits according to Manual of Style as you mentioned, many thanks --Ghaly 17:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

The folks who were interested in this discussion might also be interested in what I found in the archive of the discussion page for Pope. I had been feeling worse and worse about the Roman-centric bare-word article, but since reading this (which explaining why it's that way) I feel better. User:scbomber 03:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I saw your discussion and edited boldly to take account of what you have said and Manual of Style. The page now fits the WP disambig format better.The.helping.people.tick 23:03, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I am glad, thanks! User:scbomber 03:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

The Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Alexandria does not in actual fact use the title "pope". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.212.126 (talk) 23:25, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Reorganization

Building on The.helping.people.tick's recent edit, I did some reorganization here. It seemed worth a definition at the top, where the Greek and Latin were given, but not what they meant. Placing "Religious offices" before "Religious figures" seems to make more sense, and I have disambiguated the titles. Roman Catholics may want to remove the "Roman" from "Catholic", which I inadvertently replaced, but if they were truly familiar with other rites they'd know that "Pope of Rome" is how he is always commemorated in his own Eastern rite churches. I have therefore used it here to distinguish him from the other Popes in a NPOV way.

Sorry about the Discordian thing, but I don't see how a title applicable to everyone on earth can be thought of as a religious title in the same sense as the others, even to the extent Discordianism is taken seriously by its own adherents, so I'd moved it down to "Other". TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:58, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing in the MOS requiring the order in an introductory section of a dab page to be according to most common usage. Putting Alexandria first there is justifiable both in terms of chronological priority and alphabetical order.

In re: "Pope of Rome", see above. Since we are mentioning the Pope of other cities, it's entirely proper to employ this perfectly respectful, well-established form here. "Pope" not being among is official titles, there's no compelling reason to insist on "Pope" for him alone anyway. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:39, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

And please note I have retained the patently offensive unqualified use of "Catholic" to refer to the church headed by the Pope of Rome. TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:45, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Csernica, please review MOS Order of entries and MOS Piping for the rationale for my changes. I am reverting your recent edits in keeping with these guidelines, no offense intended. Also, use of unqualified "Catholic" is for accuracy, also no offense intended.The.helping.people.tick 22:51, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

The actual list of dab links should be in order of most common usage. Nothing at all is said in the MOS about introductory text, and to reverse the order to always put Rome first is discourteous at least.

Also, if "Catholic" unqualified was accurate from a neutral point-of-view, it wouldn't be offensive. That's why, despite repeated attempts to change the title to "Catholic Church", Roman Catholic Church has remained where it is. TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Csenica|TCC, dab pages "should begin a sentence fragment ending with a colon, introducing a bulleted list." The expanded form here violates this guideline; I suggest conforming to the MOS, which specifies opening fragments of the format, "Interval may refer to:"; in our case, it would be "Pope may refer to:" This has the further benefit of circumventing our disagreement about which term for the Catholic Church offends more people, and what constitutes NPOV.The.helping.people.tick 00:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

And I believe that we should follow this guideline so we can perform the useful task of introducing the reader to the range of possible meanings of the title before breaking down into sections. This won't change disagreement over "Catholic" anyway, which cannot avoid inclusion in the list of links when defining individual terms.

Note, by the way, the more readable form of internal links. You might find it useful if you've never tried it before. Popular pages like sections of the Manual of Style also have shortcuts that might save you typing: try MOS:DAB. TCC (talk) (contribs) 00:49, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

It is, incidentally, always a good idea to ignore rules if it results in a better encyclopedia. See WP:IAR. TCC (talk) (contribs) 00:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I approve of ignoring rule if it results in a better encyclopedia. I don't see that introducing a range of meanings adds anything for the reader that they won't get faster from a list. As for the Catholic/Roman Catholic naming conventions, I recognize that this is a biggish and rather contentious debate. In general, I agree with this editor. And thanks for the tips re: shortcuts.The.helping.people.tick 03:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

(Question)

Is "Other" the place to put 'POPE" industries, world wide makers of garden irrigation equipment for home and industry, plus a line in some countries of machines for gardens, such as lawn mowers, trimmers, hand tools (spade/fork/trowel), etc? Not really sure as I am VERY new at this wiki stuff, not really comfortable with it either so this is really a suggestion for someone else to take up, please. Thankyou.Robert Golding (talk) 17:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Correction needed

This is a disambiguation page of the term "pope". Data from section People named Pope should be moved definitely from here to pope (surname), instead of redirecting out from there to this location. --Robsuper (talk) 12:52, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

This will ensure the possibility of interwiki linking between the page "Pope (surname)" and pages "Pope" in other Wikipedias, concerning only the surname "Pope", eg. es:Pope, fi:Pope, sv:Pope (olika betydelser), or mainly the surname "Pope", eg. cs:Pope, fr:Pope (homonymie), de:Pope.

The above my suggestions derive essentially from the assumption that in Wikidata we should first take into account the disambiguation pages for the term "pope" as Bishop of Rome, and then move on to other meanings of the word "pope": surnames, geographical names, and other names. In English, you can post it all basically on the same disambiguation page (and this is now), while in other languages ​​the issue of the word "pope" is usually recognized on a separate disambiguation page. --Robsuper (talk) 10:44, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

I withdraw all my above proposals and suggestions. --Robsuper (talk) 09:25, 12 November 2013 (UTC)