This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Archives: |
Restored section on Anglican Life to template, per consensus. This is an essential element for understanding what Anglicanism is, and there is no reason it should be missing. I have placed at the top since it makes an effective transition from the generic Background to particularities. Castanea dentata ( talk) 03:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Note that there was a lively discussion, but it was removed. Wyeson 17:55, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
There are two versions going on here, an older version and a newer. Unfortunately, the Talk record has been removed.
As I and many others have stated in the past, the problem with Secisek's newer version is that it is not really very Anglican. Distinctly Anglican features have been removed and random Christian ones put up in their place.
I have restored the older template, which holds the following essential Anglican topics that had been removed without any explanation:
In the alternate version, the above Anglican topics were replaced with the following random non-Anglican topics that might be pertinent on the Christianity template:
Wyeson 17:48, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
There is no need for an edit war here. Let's look at these proposals:
Add?
Remove?
The discussion was not lively, nor was it "removed" - it was archived when nobody made a comment for almost two months. I have identified priorites above. Now, pick your battles and let's come to consensus. -- Secisek ( talk) 18:23, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
{{ Anglican Communion}} is the footer version of this template. Both {{ Continuing Anglican}} and {{ Anglican realignment}} already are in use as similar, but seperate nav boxes. The question of who is an Anglican - and who gets to decide - is being debated in the real-world right now and I think until there is real-world consensus, the seperate nav-boxes are the way to go. -- Secisek ( talk) 17:48, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
One week on, I wonder if the whole thing was nothing more than a hit and run. The only user really pushing hard for restoring an older version of the template had made 17 edits in article space since 2 June 2007 prior to last week. On 2 April he restored a version of this template from last January, commented here, and then made 16 edits in quick succession to distribute "his version" of the template. He has not been heard from since. Give it another week or so, but I think we can add Jewel and maybe Donne, drop St Paul and move on. -- Secisek ( talk) 02:45, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
The one thing I'm NOT seeing in the template is the thing that I would have thought was one of the first links: Anglican Communion itself. Shouldn't that be part? I know, seems common sense, but.... Bill Ward ( talk) 20:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
I would like to hear why this new Template:Anglican template was added, which seems to be a duplication of this one here. The editor who created it then proceeded to replace the long-standing templates with his new one. Such a change requires some explanation. Tb ( talk) 18:30, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
There's also Template:Anglocommunion duplicating this, and Template:Angloportal which duplicates Template:Anglican Portal. Tb ( talk) 18:41, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
I alerted an admin and they were all speedy deleted. Setting up "competing" templates to get around consensus is not acceptable at Wikipedia. -- Secisek ( talk) 12:36, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
The little image on the portal link was altered by an editor recently; it had been a small compassrose, and was changed to an image of the gate of Canterbury Cathedral. The edit comment said "This link is to Anglicanism, not the Anglican Communion". Of course, the first article on the Anglicanism portal is the Anglican Communion, but leaving that aside, it is certainly not a link to the Church of England, the Province of Canterbury, the Diocese of Canterbury, or Christ Cathedral in Canterbury. The compassrose is likely the most worldwide symbol for Anglicanism; it's certainly more worldwide than the gate of one Cathedral. (Tho I do agree that it is clever to use a gate as a link to the portal...) Still, that doesn't mean the compassrose is the best image. I've reverted the change (since the explanation in the edit history doesn't match the reality as I understand it). Still, more comments would be useful! Tb ( talk) 14:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
This is a very useful sidebar, but it's a bit of a big lump to fit into some pages. Any chance we could consider using
Template:Sidebar with collapsible lists to allow presentation in accordion-style lists and save a bit of space on smaller articles?
Cnbrb (
talk)
13:23, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
This comment was placed here in error due to confusing redirects. Moving to
Template talk:Anglicanism.
Cnbrb (
talk)
13:30, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
I'm confused. Why does
Template talk:Anglicanism (relating to the
Template:Anglicanism) redirect to
Template talk:AnglicanCommunion (this page)? Furthermore,
Template:AnglicanCommunion itself redirects to
Template:Anglican Communion (with a space), and when you click on the Talk link to
Template talk:Anglican Communion it redirects to
Template talk:Anglicanism footer. This is a complete mess - evidently the product of some sort of historical edit war and sloppy renaming. Can someone sort it out here, or should I just refer this to Admins?
Cnbrb (
talk)
11:40, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Couldn't be bothered waiting for anyone to reply so I've got an admin to sort this out. All good now.
Cnbrb (
talk)
13:30, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Archives: |
Restored section on Anglican Life to template, per consensus. This is an essential element for understanding what Anglicanism is, and there is no reason it should be missing. I have placed at the top since it makes an effective transition from the generic Background to particularities. Castanea dentata ( talk) 03:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Note that there was a lively discussion, but it was removed. Wyeson 17:55, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
There are two versions going on here, an older version and a newer. Unfortunately, the Talk record has been removed.
As I and many others have stated in the past, the problem with Secisek's newer version is that it is not really very Anglican. Distinctly Anglican features have been removed and random Christian ones put up in their place.
I have restored the older template, which holds the following essential Anglican topics that had been removed without any explanation:
In the alternate version, the above Anglican topics were replaced with the following random non-Anglican topics that might be pertinent on the Christianity template:
Wyeson 17:48, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
There is no need for an edit war here. Let's look at these proposals:
Add?
Remove?
The discussion was not lively, nor was it "removed" - it was archived when nobody made a comment for almost two months. I have identified priorites above. Now, pick your battles and let's come to consensus. -- Secisek ( talk) 18:23, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
{{ Anglican Communion}} is the footer version of this template. Both {{ Continuing Anglican}} and {{ Anglican realignment}} already are in use as similar, but seperate nav boxes. The question of who is an Anglican - and who gets to decide - is being debated in the real-world right now and I think until there is real-world consensus, the seperate nav-boxes are the way to go. -- Secisek ( talk) 17:48, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
One week on, I wonder if the whole thing was nothing more than a hit and run. The only user really pushing hard for restoring an older version of the template had made 17 edits in article space since 2 June 2007 prior to last week. On 2 April he restored a version of this template from last January, commented here, and then made 16 edits in quick succession to distribute "his version" of the template. He has not been heard from since. Give it another week or so, but I think we can add Jewel and maybe Donne, drop St Paul and move on. -- Secisek ( talk) 02:45, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
The one thing I'm NOT seeing in the template is the thing that I would have thought was one of the first links: Anglican Communion itself. Shouldn't that be part? I know, seems common sense, but.... Bill Ward ( talk) 20:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
I would like to hear why this new Template:Anglican template was added, which seems to be a duplication of this one here. The editor who created it then proceeded to replace the long-standing templates with his new one. Such a change requires some explanation. Tb ( talk) 18:30, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
There's also Template:Anglocommunion duplicating this, and Template:Angloportal which duplicates Template:Anglican Portal. Tb ( talk) 18:41, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
I alerted an admin and they were all speedy deleted. Setting up "competing" templates to get around consensus is not acceptable at Wikipedia. -- Secisek ( talk) 12:36, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
The little image on the portal link was altered by an editor recently; it had been a small compassrose, and was changed to an image of the gate of Canterbury Cathedral. The edit comment said "This link is to Anglicanism, not the Anglican Communion". Of course, the first article on the Anglicanism portal is the Anglican Communion, but leaving that aside, it is certainly not a link to the Church of England, the Province of Canterbury, the Diocese of Canterbury, or Christ Cathedral in Canterbury. The compassrose is likely the most worldwide symbol for Anglicanism; it's certainly more worldwide than the gate of one Cathedral. (Tho I do agree that it is clever to use a gate as a link to the portal...) Still, that doesn't mean the compassrose is the best image. I've reverted the change (since the explanation in the edit history doesn't match the reality as I understand it). Still, more comments would be useful! Tb ( talk) 14:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
This is a very useful sidebar, but it's a bit of a big lump to fit into some pages. Any chance we could consider using
Template:Sidebar with collapsible lists to allow presentation in accordion-style lists and save a bit of space on smaller articles?
Cnbrb (
talk)
13:23, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
This comment was placed here in error due to confusing redirects. Moving to
Template talk:Anglicanism.
Cnbrb (
talk)
13:30, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
I'm confused. Why does
Template talk:Anglicanism (relating to the
Template:Anglicanism) redirect to
Template talk:AnglicanCommunion (this page)? Furthermore,
Template:AnglicanCommunion itself redirects to
Template:Anglican Communion (with a space), and when you click on the Talk link to
Template talk:Anglican Communion it redirects to
Template talk:Anglicanism footer. This is a complete mess - evidently the product of some sort of historical edit war and sloppy renaming. Can someone sort it out here, or should I just refer this to Admins?
Cnbrb (
talk)
11:40, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Couldn't be bothered waiting for anyone to reply so I've got an admin to sort this out. All good now.
Cnbrb (
talk)
13:30, 31 August 2017 (UTC)