User talk:Natemup

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Happy Easter!

	Easter Joy
	Happy Easter to a fine editor! May you have a kind and joyful Paschaltide! ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:16, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Same to you, brother. He is risen! natemup (talk) 23:46, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey, glad Easter tidings to you! I wanted to give you a heads up that I recently accepted an article on Samuel Henderson (born 1827) out of the AfC process. I bet you've read a bit on him considering some of the sources used, but I highly recommend taking a peek! ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:49, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Excellent! Thanks for the heads-up. natemup (talk) 18:44, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Ed Bradley thanks

This is why I shouldn't edit Wikipedia so late in the day. Cheers M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 05:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

No worries. natemup (talk) 11:04, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Roman Catholic

Hi, I notice you're American and Catholic, and this likely influences your edit at David Waller (bishop). Roman Catholic is commonly used in British English and Waller is British. He also an ex-Anglo-Catholic and the Church of England also claims to be a "catholic church" etc. The Holy See itself uses Roman Catholic (eg Anglican–Roman Catholic dialogue [1]) to introduce clarity when Anglicans are involved; that is what is needed in such articles. You can also read Wikipedia:Catholic or Roman Catholic?.

"Roman Catholic Church" is not the name of any Wikipedia page and generally should not be used", is a nonsensical argument. There is no reason that every synonym must be replaced by an article title on Wikipedia, and in fact it is encouraged not "fix" such redirects (WP:NOTBROKEN). "generally should not be used": where are you getting this from? Also, the article itself starts with: "The Catholic Church, also known as the Roman Catholic Church".

[[Catholic Church in England and Wales|English Catholic]] prelate – this is not a helpful link. He is not "English Catholic" as the link suggests, he is an Englishman and a Catholic as separate descriptors.

There is nothing "manual of style" about your edits to this and other British Catholic bios as you edit summary tries to suggest: these changes reflect your personal preference. In fact, MOS:VAR applies in this and you should not be edit waring over a perfectly acceptable alternative which serves to improve readability and introduces clarity. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 13:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

My point was not that "Roman Catholic" isn't commonly used. It's used commonly enough here in America, too. But the official name of the Catholic Church, according to the Holy See, is the Catholic Church. (Also note that The IARCCUM is not a Vatican body, hence its hosting on a non-Vatican website.) Even so, I am aware that the Church will, in some cases, use "Roman Catholic" for various reasons—such as to denote Latin Church dioceses, which has nothing to do with Anglicanism. At the end of the day, why use a longer redirect, for "Roman Catholic Church", when there is no actual confusion? The more concise lede, headings, links, and sentences I added are perfectly readable and clear.

Per the essay you cited: "Though both versions of the name are acceptable, "Catholic Church" is the simplest form that is sufficiently clear for most purposes."

Per the guide, Wikipedia has debated this topic ad nauseam and there is a reason nearly all the Catholic pages were changed from "Roman Catholic" to "Catholic" a long time ago. What Anglo-Catholic churches claim to be is irrelevant; in this case we have them in America too and it doesn't dictate that we refer to Catholic Churches as "Roman" (though some do, for other reasons). Simply put, this is English Wikipedia, not Anglican Wikipedia.

Moreover, there is also absolutely no confusion to be had when saying someone like Waller is "a... Catholic bishop" or "converted to the Catholic Church/Catholicism". These phrases universally mean one thing, even when taking Anglicans and Anglo-Catholics into account. No reliable source uses these phrases to refer to Anglican bishops, Anglican churches, or Anglicanism. This is probably why none of the sources cited in the article—including the British ones—use the phrase "Roman Catholic" even once. Also note that there was inconsistent terminology before.

Per the essay: Throughout a single article, individuals uses of "Catholic" or "Roman Catholic" should be modified for consistency within the rest of the article (except, of course, within direct quotes, or other rare instances). Importantly, uses should also reflect the relevant reliable sources.

P.S. Concerning my actual changes on the Waller page, you reverted an entire edit that was plenty more than just removing unnecessary references to "Roman Catholic". There were various grammatical, clarity, and MOS issues.

P.S.S. Using "[insert nationality] Catholic" in the first sentence of an article about a notable Catholic figure is very common on Wikipedia and is why I started making these edits. They also help to make various ledes more precise (and not just for Brits). natemup (talk) 14:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)