Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Roman Catholic Church/Archive 4

Rubric for decomposing the problem into its parts

In the section "Decomposing the problem into its parts" above, I have transcluded another table that I constructed to help me understand the various dimensions of this problem. Perhaps I should have transcluded it here instead of above but that is an edit that is easily made later if deemed appropriate. If the table is deemed to be unhelpful, it is also easily deleted. However, I think it is helpful for us to determine which phrases are acceptable and unacceptable to us both individually and as a group.

For example, using the table, I can now determine that the two phrases that I find most desirable are:

which strongly prefers to ~~call itself~~ use the name "the Catholic Church" in official contexts
which strongly prefers to ~~call itself~~ use the name "the Catholic Church" in official documents

Looking at the rubric as a whole, I think the points of contention are around the "weakening words" and the choice of "officially" vs. "official contexts" or "official documents". I understand that some editors such as Xandar oppose the use of "weakening words". I wonder if they might accept the weakening in the interest of compromise and consensus.

--Richard (talk) 17:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Compromise and consensus are good, but there must be ACCURATE compromise and consensus. "..strongly prefers to use the name the Catholic Church in official contexts," is a big shift of meaning away from "..officially known as the Catholic Church."

The current wording states clearly that Catholic Church is the official name of the church. Richard's proposal has several flaws as it stands. 1) "..prefers to use the name" Catholic Church (or any similar construction) still gives the impression that RCC is the proper name and that Catholic Church is sometimes used. 2) "..in official contexts" is not the same as saying it is the proper or official name. Instead it gives the impression that "Catholic Church" is only used or "preferred" in official contexts, and RCC for others, which is not true. It is used in all contexts. This is in sharp contrast with the unqualified use of the term "Roman Catholic church". It therefore fails the test of giving clear information on the Church's actual name.

I feel that my recent suggestion, "The RCC - in official usage the Catholic Church - " provides a better solution and basis for compromise. It is not as strong as "officially known as..", and, 1) It removes the pedantic issue of whether the Church has actually passed a resolution saying in those exact words, "the official name of the Church is the Catholic Church." which has been a major part of Soidi and Gimmetrow's argument. 2) It is non-value-sensitive, it merely states facts. It does not state that Catholic Church is the proper name of the church, but it is strong enough to make clear that that is the name ordinarily and properly used. 3) It is short and uncomplicated - a key factor in the lead sentence. 4) it complies with the references.

I can't really see serious objections to this wording. Xandar 20:43, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think I can go with "in official usage". We need to see if Gimmetrow, Soidi and Defteri can get on board this solution as well. --Richard (talk) 20:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Xandar and Richard got in before I could save the following:

"in official contexts" is, to my mind, far too vague an expression: it would be constantly attracting attempts to clarify it and thus improve it. In the second proposal, I dislike "which strongly prefers"; but if Nancy and Xandar were to surprise me by accepting this proposal, I would probably bring myself to accept it. Unless they do, I will make no effort to overcome my dislike of it. I have no difficulty whatever with "uses the name".

I now add: Of course, Xandar's proposal is not acceptable: it ignores the fact that in the Church's official usage more than one name is used. Defteri (talk) 21:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"In official usage" shifts the sentence to observable facts, which is good, but it still implies there is only one name ever "officially used". Is "Catholic Church" even the most common way the church refers to itself in most official documents? Doubtful. What is the real difficulty with switching the order, and saying "The Catholic Church, also known as the Roman Catholic Church..."? That would seem to give priority to the one name without implying it's a presumption. If the only objection is some WP:MOS recommendation, I think we might consider "Ignoring any recommendation" that impedes stability and accuracy. Gimmetrow 21:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The argument that more than one official name is used is unreferenced, and tenuous at best. The worldwide Church at least 99% of the time uses "Catholic Church" officially and otherwise. Any deviations from this that people are concerned about can be easily covered in a footnote. They are not important enough for anything more. The idea of reversing the order that comes from gimmetrow solves the immediate problem by placing "Catholic church" first. However I fear that when the article returns to Featured Article Candidacy, non-adherence to the WP:MOS will become a major issue - and then we would be back re-arguing the whole issue again, but this time at FAC. I would rather we have a permanent solution now. Xandar 22:39, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since you're asking for sources, please provide the sources which unambiguously demonstrate that this church exclusively uses one name to refer to itself. Or even that "Catholic Church" is used 99% of the time. Gimmetrow 22:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We still haven't seen your sources. We have provided secondary sources for the official name. As far as examples of usage are concerned, these include virtually all official documents and pronouncements in the past 40 years, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the lists of Bishops conferences, the documents of Vatican II etc. (Oh, and "exclusively" doesn't appear in my proposal.) Xandar 23:56, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your proposal is, I understand "The RCC - in official usage the Catholic Church", right? That implies that in all "official usage", only the term "Catholic Church" ever appears. Care to source that? Gimmetrow 00:02, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We can not enter into a compromise position that asks us to ignore the only reliable references we have which are listed and linked here [1] -none of which say anything about Roman Catholic being an official name or that Catholic is usually used, they all state that Catholic "is" the official name and not something else. More than one even states that Roman Catholic is not the official name. Until Gimmetrow, Defteri, Soidi or anyone else can come up with a reliable reference to support their position, I don't know why this argument is being allowed to continue. This harrassment of the page editors has gone on for four months now - we keep asking for references and we never get any response as evidenced once again on this mediation page just above. [2]. At what point is an editor barred from this kind of harrassment of legitimate editors? NancyHeise ^talk 02:15, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nancy, I would counsel you to consider WP:CIVIL. Not that you are the only one who has been uncivil in this discussion but it is uncivil to suggest that some of the parties to this dispute are not "legitimate" editors. I also don't see this discussion as being inappropriate for a mediation. What else did you expect from the mediation process? I don't see any harassment except perhaps from you. I understand that you are frustrated but I would suggest that others are also frustrated and venting your frustration does not help the mediation process.

Now, from a content perspective, I am not sure which "compromise position" implies that Roman Catholic Church is an official name. None of the proposed wordings says explicitly that Roman Catholic Church is an official name although there are editors (Gimmetrow, Soidi and Defteri) who would like to make that assertion explicit. The currently proposed compromises simply leave the door open for the possibility of an explanatory note that comments among other things that the phrase "Roman Catholic" is disliked by some Catholics and used without opprobrium by others.

--Richard (talk) 02:29, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You misunderstand my position about "official name". I have no interest in inserting any claims that "Roman Catholic Church is an official name" because that line still doesn't make clear what "official name" means, and in the meaning most obvious to me, RCC is not an official name. Gimmetrow 02:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'm not sure if "you" applies to me or to Nancy but, if to me, then I apologize for misrepresenting your position. Would we all be happier if we just got rid of "official" altogether as has been proposed in Xandar's "Catholic Church, also known as RCC" compromise? That would neither say that Catholic Church was the official name nor that RCC was an official name. Any further nuanced get shoved into the Note if we decide to have one. --Richard (talk) 03:51, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(What I was going to write before edit-conflicting with NancyHeise)

I am very much in favor of "The Catholic Church, also known as the Roman Catholic Church" with or without a note to explain the difference. If we phrase the lead sentence that way, we get around the whole dispute of whether or not "the Catholic Church" is "the official name" but simply assert that "the Catholic Church" is the name of the church (which we all agree on and have sources for) and imply that "Roman Catholic Church" is an "AKA" alias for the church (which is also supported by sources).

BTW, I also support moving the name of this article back to "Catholic Church" but that's another tarball that we should leave alone for now.

--Richard (talk) 02:30, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I respond to this suggestion in the following section. NancyHeise ^talk 05:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]