Talk:Karadima case

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Bmclaughlin9 in topic Karadima case?

File:Karadima.jpg Nominated for Deletion edit

  An image used in this article, File:Karadima.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 16 July 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:05, 20 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Abusing Minors edit

The NYT's title is "Chilean Priest Found Guilty of Abusing Minors". That must be replicated to the categories. --Keysanger (what?) 11:45, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Karadima case? edit

Clearly Karadima case is an inadequate name for this entry. It's become something broader like Karadima-Barros, but in fact the entire "affair" is still more than that. Splitting Karadima from Barros-Francis isn't helpful, since it's really one fairly continuous though admittedly also discontinuous story. I don't think there's any need to change the name very soon, but it needs a name that suggests the involvement of the Chilean hierarchy and of Rome as well. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 02:41, 30 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

After some thought I trimmed this back down the core of the Karadima case with some follow-on material. I created Catholic sexual abuse cases in Chile for the broader subject and created as well a biography for Juan Barros Madrid. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 16:17, 19 May 2018 (UTC)Reply