Talk:Ruthenian Catholic Archeparchy of Smolensk

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) ASUKITE 18:07, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ruthenian Catholic Archeparchy of Smolensk → Archeparchy of Smolensk (Ruthenian Uniate Church) – To distinguish it from similar entities in the Russian Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church. See disambig note. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:36, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following projects have been notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy; Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism. Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:39, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It’s probably fair to notify the projects listed at the top of this talk page. —Michael Z. 16:40, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The proposal might be clearer or more convincing if it linked to however many “similar entities” there are with actual article titles, and referred unambiguously to whatever “disambig note” is.  —Michael Z. 17:32, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mzajac: How could you miss the disambig note at the top of this article? That needs explaining? Oh well... here it is then - Bishop of Smolensk. Just follow the blue link for a full list of similarly-named entities. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:37, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I found it later and still wasn’t positive everything I found was what you meant. I’m just suggesting you explicitly state your entire case in a proposal, and not assume everyone will follow all links, make the same inferences, and then be able to discuss it while trying to remember what they saw on a few other pages. Like right now I look up at your proposal, and I don’t know what or how many “similar entities” you’re referring to. I can’t remember whether I found the answer to those questions back then, and I’m not willing to repeat the necessary research through I don’t know which pages on this enormous website.  —Michael Z. 21:14, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Standard wording and already disambiguated by the addition of the name of the church. No idea therefore what the nominator means by disambiguation being needed. See Category:Former Eastern Catholic dioceses. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:29, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply @Necrothesp: "standard"? What standard? There are multiple entities with near-equivalent names; they need to be disambiguated. The only question is, "Which is the correct type of disambiguator?". For geography, it is the comma; for type it is parentheses. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:55, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• The standard, as is quite clear, is "Ruthenian Catholic Eparchy of Blah". I'm really not sure why you think that needs changing. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:11, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose 
  WP:CONSISTENT with other articles. —Michael Z. 23:11, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]

So you think that "Ruthenian Catholic Eparchy of Blah" is unambiguously different to "Roman Catholic Eparchy of Blah"? Whereas putting the denominations in parentheses wouldn't cause a reader to pause and wonder if there was not a real difference between the two terms? Neither usage is natural or common since people would only ever refer to them in common talk as the "Eparchy of Blah"; the denomination would never be used. So then, we have the option to differentiate by placing the denomination in "natural" language before the eparchy, or in parentheses after the eparchy. In terms of clarity, parentheses wins IMHO. Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:33, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can I take it that you didn’t bother following the link where the Wikipedia terminology natural disambiguation is explained?  —Michael Z. 16:37, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support in theory, oppose for now: The official names of many—if not most—dioceses/eparchies/sees do not include their denomination. In a historic context such as this, it's even less likely a denominational title was officially included. While a discussion like this would be the perfect time to remedy the discrepancy between Anglican dioceses with no disambiguation and Catholic ones with them (as well as finally remove the persist inaccurate nomenclature of "Roman Catholic"), this is a huge undertaking that would require support from numerous projects to effect. If we could get such support, I would be on board. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:48, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Ruthenian Catholic (Arch)eparchy of "Foo", Roman Catholic (Arch)diocese of "Foo", etc are appropriate and used by the Church. For instance, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Joliet in Illinois lists on its website in its header "Roman Catholic Diocese of Joliet" (link), while the Chaldean Catholic Eparchy of Saint Thomas the Apostle of Detroit refers to itself as the "Chaldean Diocese of St. Thomas the Apostle U.S.A." on its site. (link). Official names for latin diocese don't seem to spell out the church (eg Diœcesis Joliettensis in Illinois) , but eastern diocese seem to include the church at the end of the name (eg Eparchia Sancti Thomas Apostoli Detroitensis Chaldaeorum). I think the church name being at the end of the name is a matter of Latin grammar (ie I think adjectives follow the noun in Latin while precede the noun in English.) Referencer12 (talk) 23:45, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply @Referencer12: I would have no difficulty with this having the RC word order if there was only one such diocese. However, the Russian Orthodox Church also has a diocese of the same name. For that reason, a different word order and differentiator is needed that has some consistency between the two entities. Also, "Ruthenian" is nowadays used to refer to the Ruthenian Greek Catholic Church which is completely different from the Ruthenian Uniate Church. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:33, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Laurel Lodged OK, so my understanding is the issues are as follows:

  1. For this article, "Ruthenian Catholic..." is incorrect and should be "Ruthenian Uniate..."

  2. "Diocese of Smolensk" leads to essentially a disambiguation page when it should probably lead to ROC Diocese of Smolensk.

  Correct?

  If so, Propose:

  1. Rename "Ruthenian Catholic..." to "Ruthenian Uniate..."
     1. Make "Ruthenian Catholic..." redirect to "Ruthenian Uniate..."
  2. Move "Diocese of Smolensk" to "Diocese of Smolensk (disambiguation)"
  3. Make "Diocese of Smolensk" redirect to ROC Diocese of Smolensk.
  4. Leave the titles of all other Diocese of Smolensk articles as is.

  Thoughts? Referencer12 (talk) 00:17, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply @Referencer12: Not my ideal solution but I could live with it. Laurel Lodged (talk) 13:16, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy oppose "Uniate" is depreciated (to put it mildly). The current title fully matches the well established naming convention. –Zfish118^⋉talk 07:36, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply "Uniate" is not now used, but at the time of operation of the eparchy, it was in use. If you @Zfish118: have a problem with the word, you should raise it on the main page - Ruthenian Uniate Church - not here. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:27, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]