16,951
edits
Changes
no edit summary
The reason for this note is I notice that we have two categories covering the ruling bishops in Japan: Bishops of… and Metropolitans of … . I proposed that we use only one and that be Metropolitans of … . This would follow having all the ruling bishops of Russia, as an example, whether they were bishops, metropolitans or patriarchs. [[User:Wsk|Wsk]] 20:09, April 2, 2010 (UTC)
:Hi, Andy,
Your comments certainly open up further the dilemma I've had about the inconsistencies we have over titles, spellings, and such. I find myself going in circles at times, especially with transliterations. And, your question on the title for the ruling bishops of Japan hits right at it, as I may have been inconsistent myself.
I think the proper tittle for the metropolitans since autonomy is Metropolitan of Tokyo. According to the OCA's ''Orthodox America'' the title from Bp. Ireney to autonomy was bishop/archbishop of Tokyo. Before Bp. Ireney, I am not sure what the 'official' titles were. In a thesis by Masatoshi John Shoji, of which I have a copy, his references to Metr. Segius and Bp. Nicholas (Ono) are "…of Japan" and for Abp. Nicholas before them I'm less such.
After all this I suggest we use the current title of "…of Tokyo" and, as you note, just mention the differences in the article prolog, such as has been done for the Patriarch of Moscow. - Bill Kosar [[User:Wsk|Wsk]] 16:39, April 5, 2010 (UTC)
