Talk:United Episcopal Church of North America
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Image copyright problem with File:ACClogo.png edit
The image File:ACClogo.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
- That this article is linked to from the image description page.
The following images also have this problem:
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --10:28, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Personal Ordinariate edit
Apart from the Traditional Anglican Communion, the article should really consider verifying whether groups within the United Episcopal Church of North America have ever sought a similar canonical structure to the proposed personal ordinariates. ADM (talk) 18:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
As a member of the clergy within this jurisdiction, I will say that there currently is not any church seeking inclusion in the Roman Catholic Church's personal ordinariates. Shadowmane (talk) 23:38, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Seal for the UECNA edit
Lately, a fellow Wikipedian has contributed to the production of SVG files which have been placed in numerous Continuing Anglican articles, replacing the old JPEG and PNG files of several. While this has occurred, and for this page especially, Subdeacon has forgone a superseded file for the restoration of a grainy JPEG image which has remained on the article for years it seems. I would like to denote that the JPEG shouldn't be restored for the sole sake of it being superseded with a literally higher-quality file. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia ever ascending with better resources, would it not be best to retain the newer file which remains true to the JPEG despite not being elongated? - TheLionHasSeen (talk) 02:49, 12 February 2023 (UTC)