Talk:Catholic Church

GA Reassessment

Catholic Church

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: No consensus. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:27, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Several uncited sections, including almost the entire first section of the History section. History focuses disproportionately on 20th and 21st century. Z1720 (talk) 17:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Disagree that the history weighting is a significant problem. Might require a minor rebalancing—-I’m not sure why John Paul II has his own section while other popes do not (aside from Francis, but the case for having a section on the current pope is strong)—-but that’s a modest edit, not a reason to delist. The several uncited paragraphs in the History section (which look to be the only significantly uncited section to me) do need fixed, but I note that History of the Catholic Church has a pretty well-cited early history section, so that shouldn’t be a hard fix. Reassessment seems a pretty big overreaction for these problems—-it’s pretty firmly WP:JUSTDOIT territory. El Sandifer (talk) 20:25, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

• Keep on grounds offered. The first part of the History section appears to be a lede-style summary of the subsections afterward (a la WP:LEADCITE), with the relevant citations in the respective subsections. If truly desired, go and move the relevant citations back up, but this is a style that isn't unreasonable. As for focus - the Catholic Church is a topic where multi-volume books have been written on it, there is no one perfect amount to cover on each time period. I will say that random readers are probably more interested in the recent history aspect, so it wouldn't shock me if the 2424 article on the Catholic Church disproportionately focuses on the 24th century. SnowFire (talk) 21:56, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
• Delist 1) if the unsourced content in the history section is a sourced elsewhere in the article, it is redundant and needs to be removed per GACR#3b 2) obvious recentism in the history section. The Catholic Church has a really long history so the twentieth and twenty first centuries need to be covered in similar amount of detail as other historical epochs, and summary style needs to be used. Note that I did not look at the rest of the article (t · c) buidhe 17:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
• Keep There is no obvious "recentism" in the history section. The 20th century section does not appear disproportionately long compared to the rest of the section. I also see no uncited sections. Note that my comments pertain to this most recent revision. –Zfish118^⋉talk 18:58, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Note that Zfish118's comment follows my examination and removal of the offending parts. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 03:04, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Excellent work in trimming the history section! –Zfish118^⋉talk 03:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

SSPX should be on the list of “separations” in the wiki box

In context of the recent excommunications & declaration of schism it only makes sense ~2026-38076-19 (talk) 15:16, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

They're just not that significant a grouping nor terribly distinct from groups that already gall under the listed prior schisms. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:32, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

Sedevacantists & Old Catholics are no more significant ~2026-38082-78 (talk) 01:05, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 July 2026

Change “becoming the largest non-governmental provider of education and health care” to “being the largest non-governmental provider of education and health care”

to make consistent the verb tense of the sentence as a whole ~2026-40576-77 (talk) 18:55, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Partly done: Changed to "making it the largest non-governmental provider of education and health care", which seems like the best way to word things. Day Creature (talk) 05:37, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

Descriptions of pre-Great Schism Christians

I noticed that Imperial/Great Church Christians before the Great Schism are labeled as "Roman Catholic/Catholic" if they're from Latin-speaking regions, while those in the East are labeled as "Orthodox" if they're from Greek-speaking areas. This seems an anachronism. We have no absolute confident what any of these figures would have affirmed if they would have lived. Has there been a discussion surrounding this? ~2026-43538-14 (talk) 03:17, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

In these instances, it is fine to distinguish people as Western, Eastern, Syriac, etc. Best practice is (almost always) to follow how highly reliable sources describe them. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:41, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2026

Change Founder from Jesus Christ of Nazareth to St Peter the Apostle (de facto) and Jesus Christ of Nazareth DamianoDaC (talk) 16:14, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before posting an edit request. seems to have been discussed on multiple occasions in the past, so inappropriate for edit request Cannolis (talk) 19:06, 11 August 2026 (UTC)