Jump to content

Talk:Cistercians

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Coat of Arms

[edit]

The coat of arms depicted appear to be those of France with an escutcheon of Burgundy; i.e., more appropriate as the arms of the Abbey of Citeaux rather than of the entire Cistercian order.

I disagree: it is the coat of arms for all of the Cistercian order, but all the individual abbeys, priories, &tc have their own coat of arms in addition to this. Please visit the OCSO official website for confirmation. +Br Geoff van der Weegen O.Cist (brabo@talktalk.net)

"main body of the order"?

[edit]

The article says that the Common Observance represent "the main body of the order", but a sentence later points out that the Strict Observance significantly outnumbers the Common Observance. Why does the CO represent the main body? --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 22:27, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because the Trappists were the breakaway and the CO are the mainstream. The USA has a bigger population than the UK, but that doesn't mean the USA is the real British Empire! Ender's Shadow Snr (talk) 11:39, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reformation section

[edit]

The text only discusses the experience of the order in England, whereas dissolution would have occurred wherever Protestantism came to be state religions. So there's a need for a country by country analysis of the record. Ender's Shadow Snr (talk) 11:41, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaning up an article overflowing with tangents

[edit]

@Drew Stanley : Could you make some detailed explanations about why you reverted my changes to the page? I have been working on the page for a few days now, trying to trim the numerous tangents, lots of WP:UNDUE, and a fair share of redundancies. I have taken out some sourced material, but only in cases where it was superfluous. I would welcome your input. -- Melchior2006 (talk) 15:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hpw can a photo be redundant and how could a source be superfluous

the article is so lacking in sources as it is probably better to start with removing the tangents without sources. maybe you can remove one tangent at a time instead of all at once so that you can explain what is wrong with them. Otherwise it looks like vandalism Drew Stanley (talk) 15:53, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, may I ask you to refer to specific examples? There are many superfluous photos deleted from Wiki articles every day, and there are also sometimes sourced assertions which should be deleted. Vandalism is destructive; my edits are an attempt to improve the article. Let's focus the discussion with concrete examples. -- Melchior2006 (talk) 16:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes my example is the photos that you deleted. They are relevant to Cistercians but you deleted them. i put them back. how did you improve the article? Drew Stanley (talk) 16:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are many photos relevant to the Cistercian Order, but we can't put them all in the article. Which picture's removal did you find problematic? -- Melchior2006 (talk) 18:33, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
and you work for the Catholic Church Drew Stanley (talk) 16:33, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Working for the Catholic Church" does not disqualify me from improving articles about Catholic institutions. See WP:NPOV. Do you have substantial objections that we should discuss? -- Melchior2006 (talk) 18:35, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
do one thing at a time. You have vandalized in your attempts to improve the article - that is substantial.

See WP:COI. You should actually be posting here in the discussion about your edits Drew Stanley (talk) 19:47, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to a specific question, otherwise your recent edits will not stand. Wikipedia editors need to establish consensus; if you have any logical arguments to make, we would welcome them. So far, you have argued that deleting an image from an overloaded article amounts to "vandalism". Please support your arguments. I just opened a request for a third opinion. -- Melchior2006 (talk) 12:40, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently adding redundancies is "not vandalism," and this Catholic Church employee went on this page because i work on it. good thing you opened a request.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Our_Lady_Seat_of_Wisdom_College_(Cameroon)&diff=prev&oldid=1252693064 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Our_Lady_Seat_of_Wisdom_College_(Cameroon)&diff=next&oldid=1252693064 Drew Stanley (talk) 18:39, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]