Talk:St. Elizabeth of Hungary Church
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Suggested merge
[edit]- Opposed - Simply because the Archdiocese of New York has merged the 'parishes involved is no reason to merge the articles, which deal not only with the parish but with the actual churches. In most cases, merging would be confusing for the readers. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:10, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
- On the contrary, some of these churches are mere stubs. Some, like John the Martyr, don't even have a page. Where should that information go? - or should it be lost like the church? Unless the building has landmark status of some kind, the church has more to do with the history of the resident community, which is, in fact, the primary objection of the parishioners. Merging retains all the information about the parish, particularly if it is defunct and the building demolished. It also immediately directs anyone looking for records to the facility having custody of them. If you check the websites of some of these, they are calling themselves "The Church of A and B". (Please see St. Mary - St. Joseph Church (Poughkeepsie, New York), where the second church did, in fact, have an article, but someone five or six years ago deleted it as non-notable.) I fail to see how this would be confusing. Nonetheless, as you object, I will remove the tag -which has been up for a year. Mannanan51 (talk) 06:25, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
- Some are stubs, but some are much more, and you're tagging for merger pretty much any churches that the diocese has combines, which is not, in mny mind, sufficient reason to combine them. Our interests here are encyclopedic and not ecclesiatical. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:35, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
- So what is the encyclopedic value of some old buildings even the owner no longer wants? And again, what do you do with information for those churches that do not have their own article? Nothing? Mannanan51 (talk) 06:59, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
- You're asking what the value of an historic piece of architecture is? You really should not be working on these articles. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:17, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
- Define "historic". Mannanan51 (talk) 05:50, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
- No, I'm done talking with you, your attitude make it highly improbable that we can ever reach an agreement. I oppose the merge, you support it, therefore there's no consensus at this time. Do not perform a merge until you have a consensus to do so. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:16, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
- Define "historic". Mannanan51 (talk) 05:50, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
- You're asking what the value of an historic piece of architecture is? You really should not be working on these articles. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:17, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
- So what is the encyclopedic value of some old buildings even the owner no longer wants? And again, what do you do with information for those churches that do not have their own article? Nothing? Mannanan51 (talk) 06:59, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
- Some are stubs, but some are much more, and you're tagging for merger pretty much any churches that the diocese has combines, which is not, in mny mind, sufficient reason to combine them. Our interests here are encyclopedic and not ecclesiatical. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:35, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
- On the contrary, some of these churches are mere stubs. Some, like John the Martyr, don't even have a page. Where should that information go? - or should it be lost like the church? Unless the building has landmark status of some kind, the church has more to do with the history of the resident community, which is, in fact, the primary objection of the parishioners. Merging retains all the information about the parish, particularly if it is defunct and the building demolished. It also immediately directs anyone looking for records to the facility having custody of them. If you check the websites of some of these, they are calling themselves "The Church of A and B". (Please see St. Mary - St. Joseph Church (Poughkeepsie, New York), where the second church did, in fact, have an article, but someone five or six years ago deleted it as non-notable.) I fail to see how this would be confusing. Nonetheless, as you object, I will remove the tag -which has been up for a year. Mannanan51 (talk) 06:25, 24 December 2017 (UTC)