Difference between revisions of "Talk:Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia, New Zealand and the Philippines"

From OrthodoxWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 8: Line 8:
 
::Regarding the other jurisdiction, I'm not sure where you're referring to, but I would be happy for you to fix it (and since it was quite possibly my fault anyway...).  However, something to keep in mind: the census 2001 figures are quite handy to have, if only as a comparison (since, for example, I'm quite certain that there are far more than 300,000 Greeks in Australia). -- {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 05:40, February 7, 2006 (CST)
 
::Regarding the other jurisdiction, I'm not sure where you're referring to, but I would be happy for you to fix it (and since it was quite possibly my fault anyway...).  However, something to keep in mind: the census 2001 figures are quite handy to have, if only as a comparison (since, for example, I'm quite certain that there are far more than 300,000 Greeks in Australia). -- {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 05:40, February 7, 2006 (CST)
  
 +
==Statistics==
 
Thanks for fixing up the internal link to the new archdiocesan name.
 
Thanks for fixing up the internal link to the new archdiocesan name.
  
Line 17: Line 18:
  
 
:I'm not sure, but you could have been referring to the statistics article - I tried to clear that one up, removing all confusion, but keeping all detail, hope it worked... -- {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 15:43, February 7, 2006 (CST)
 
:I'm not sure, but you could have been referring to the statistics article - I tried to clear that one up, removing all confusion, but keeping all detail, hope it worked... -- {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 15:43, February 7, 2006 (CST)
 +
 +
==Sidebox==
 +
Regarding the sidebox - going through the parish listings, none of the churches use Belarus, Bulgarian, Greek (modern or Byzantine), Russian, Serbian or Ukrainian.
 +
 +
Also, what is the [[Eastern Hierarchs]] organisation alluded to in the article?  Haven't heard of them.  Are they a pseudo-SCCOCA group, or any eastern tradition (eg. Uniates and Oriental Orthodox)?  Also, I tried to make the History sections link better; perhaps more can be fleshed out later.  Thanks, {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 04:42, March 9, 2006 (CST)

Revision as of 10:42, March 9, 2006

Parish Listing

I'm not entirely sure that a listing of parishes on this page is entirely appropriate. First, such a listing is already available on the antiochian.org.au (and antiochian.org.nz websites), and it seems unnecessary to have it here. Second, it doesn't seem to talk about the archdiocese, and seems big enough to have it's own article (perhaps at Antiochian parishes in Australasia or something similar) - one could not do a similar thing with the Greek archdiocese, nor (most likely) with the Serbian dioceses. Third, there is already a number of listings of parishes, albeit by state. Perhaps you'd be able to elucidate on what the parish listing contributes? cheers, --— by Pιsτévο talk complaints at 02:25, February 7, 2006 (CST)

His Eminence invited me to add it. I did. If you as editor don't want it, then I have no control over that. At least I can inform HE that I did as he asked, but was overruled. The other thing is, there is another jurisdiction which has an article on Orthodoxwiki discussing the Antiochian parishes in Australasia and severely understating the number. This listing gives the correct number and location in contravention to that erroneous listing. -- Chrisg 2006 Feb 07 19:50 EAST
Not that I am officially an editor, but in this area especially, I would be inclined to follow the person who has official standing in the archdiocese (ie, in this case, your self), particularly under an archepiscopal request.
Another concern (although mild, and none of my business) was that it would, if anything, show how small the jurisdiction was: previously, the only jurisdictions that have parish listings on their page are bishopless jurisdictions.
Regarding the other jurisdiction, I'm not sure where you're referring to, but I would be happy for you to fix it (and since it was quite possibly my fault anyway...). However, something to keep in mind: the census 2001 figures are quite handy to have, if only as a comparison (since, for example, I'm quite certain that there are far more than 300,000 Greeks in Australia). -- — by Pιsτévο talk complaints at 05:40, February 7, 2006 (CST)

Statistics

Thanks for fixing up the internal link to the new archdiocesan name.

I don't remember precisely where the false figures were. I think it was in the history of Orthodoxy in Australia. I'll look again when I get some more time.

Thanx again

Chris

I'm not sure, but you could have been referring to the statistics article - I tried to clear that one up, removing all confusion, but keeping all detail, hope it worked... -- — by Pιsτévο talk complaints at 15:43, February 7, 2006 (CST)

Sidebox

Regarding the sidebox - going through the parish listings, none of the churches use Belarus, Bulgarian, Greek (modern or Byzantine), Russian, Serbian or Ukrainian.

Also, what is the Eastern Hierarchs organisation alluded to in the article? Haven't heard of them. Are they a pseudo-SCCOCA group, or any eastern tradition (eg. Uniates and Oriental Orthodox)? Also, I tried to make the History sections link better; perhaps more can be fleshed out later. Thanks, — by Pιsτévο talk complaints at 04:42, March 9, 2006 (CST)