Jump to content

Talk:2018 Moscow–Constantinople schism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 13 February 2020

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. (non-admin closure) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:21, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]



2018 Moscow–Constantinople schism2018–2020 Moscow–Constantinople schism – After successful move from Arab protests (2018-present) to 2018–2020 Arab protests, this request moves seems is more reasonable. Per MOS:DATERANGE, A simple year–year range is written using an en dash not an em dash, hyphen, or slash; this dash is unspaced (that is, with no space on either side); and the range's end year is usually given in full if any events occurs more than 1 year (for example 2018-2020, 1981-1992). In order to be consistent to these format, this article should be rename to reflect the ongoing events in the sidebar. I know that first request move is unsuccessful because request year range like 2018-20 which seems incorrect if happen more than one year. 36.76.229.147 (talk) 14:10, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since I presume this is the nominator based on the highly similar edit histories: you don't need to support your own nomination, it's already implied. If you do, please mark it as "Support as nominator" lest it look like vote-stuffing. SnowFire (talk) 15:15, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Name of this schism

[edit]

There is no widely accepted name for this schism. Wikipedia should not list three out of countless descriptions of this schism and present them as established terms. Surtsicna (talk) 18:03, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 November 2022

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus.(non-admin closure) Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 18:36, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]


2018 Moscow–Constantinople schismOrthodox schism (2018-) – I think it would be a good idea to move this article because the title is still too restricted ; indeed, the schism is no longer confined to a quarrel between Moscow and Constantinople but has developed. Moscow broke communion with other autocephalous Churches (Alexandria, Cyprus, Greece) and some of them broke communion in return. In this case, it is Alexandria ; it's inacurrate to leave Moscow-Constantinople when the extent of the schism is greater and Alexandria broke communion in return, which Constantinople did not. AgisdeSparte (talk) 13:03, 24 November 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:40, 2 December 2022 (UTC) — Relisting.  — Amakuru (talk) 06:56, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Christianity has been notified of this discussion. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:40, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose (Wait [for next year, until change my mind]): The main reason of this schism happened, was over the Moscow Patriarchate/Orthodox Church of Russia immaturely handled the news of the Ecumenical Patirachate's creation of a Unified Ukrainian Orthodox Church, four years ago, and this continues on with the other autocephalous orthodox churches were prior to November. Where only the ROC (immaturely) cutting ties with these three churches as you mentioned. But, despite that, none three them did that return (reciprocated), until Alexanderia did a limited kinda (or a mild) cut ties of ROC in a form of anti-acknowedgment, a week ago. Not a full-on cutting ties with them yet, per se.
Also, nevermind this year, where it's own automous churches has dramaitically cutting ties (either willingly or enforcly) with the ROC due of that war (that Russia itself made), take told with their religion. Chad The Goatman (talk) 04:56, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 24 December 2022

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. No consensus to move. (closed by non-admin page mover) echidnaLives - talk - edits 06:14, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]


2018 Moscow–Constantinople schism2018 Moscow–Constantinople Orthodox schism – It was suggested above to rename as Orthodox Schism (2018-). This request instead simply adds Orthodox to the current name. It makes the topic clearer, while avoiding imprecision. The initial break was the ROC and Greek Orthodox, making the original title appropriate. Adding Orthodox clarifies that it is a church schism, rather than a political one or otherwise. –Zfish118talk 03:44, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Christianity has been notified of this discussion. –Zfish118talk 18:51, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The logo of the article depicts the Russian patriarch. I think it should depict the Ecumenical Patriarch, because he is senior and the article should also depict this by mentioning him first. At lest make a combined logo.

[edit]

The logo of the article depicts the Russian patriarch. I think it should depict the Ecumenical Patriarch, because he is senior and the article should also depict this by mentioning him first. At lest make a combined logo. 46.177.235.81 (talk) 05:57, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]