Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2012 June 10

< June 9	June 11 >

June 10 edit

Template:Ex Corde Ecclesiae US Catholic colleges edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was no consensus Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:46, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ex Corde Ecclesiae US Catholic colleges (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Nominated for deletion because the content is taken from College Confidential as a subjective, non-Catholic juridical listing of conservative Roman Catholic Colleges; NO official ecclesiastical category or listing of so-called Ex Corde colleges exists. 50.33.182.117 (talk) 17:44, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this a template for all US institutions that subscribe to Ex Corde Ecclesiae? Nyttend (talk) 12:50, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No. Its source is from a list of so-called conservative Catholic colleges in the US published by a website called College Confidential. Only ordinaries of dioceses and the pope can determine and declare whether a a Catholic higher educational institution subscribes to Ex Corde Ecclesiae; however, there is no such public list. Any statement by a college, etc. has no official bearing. There is a list of higher educational institutions recognized by bishops as Catholic (eg, Official Catholic Directory) but not as in compliance with Ex Corde Ecclesiae. Hence, this list is bogus. It's not encyclopedic information but rather subjective bias. 50.33.182.130 (talk) 01:12, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep --Denysmonroe81 (talk) 21:21, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because there is no basis for this category. 174.252.225.26 (talk) 21:24, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The only way to theologically discriminate among American Catholic colleges. Other Catholic colleges support the students selecting their own magesterium. This is contrary to Papal doctrine. None of this material is discussed within the articles because it might violate pov. This is the only way. It is npov because it lists colleges which have made the choice of following the pope. Teaching theologians in ex corde ecclesiae schools have vowed to uphold this doctrine. Other Catholic colleges have rather pointedly not made this a requirement. Student7 (talk) 01:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. First, especially for those who claim to be committed to the magisterium: You cannot speak for the magisterium. There is NO official list of Catholic higher educational institutions that adhere to Ex Corde Ecclesiae. Hence, any list that is proposed is opinion, not fact. Second, even Catholic institutions cannot in any finality claim that they adhere to Ex Corde Ecclesiae. In fact, almost NO institution makes such a claim. Only the ordinary of a diocese within which an institution is located can make such a claim, or, if he so chooses, the pope, and vicariously, the the Roman curia. Third, the listed source of this template is the website "College Confidential". How can a secular website be the judge of those institutions that follow Ex Corde Ecclesiae? Are advocates of this template serious in equating the judgment of College Confidential and the magisterium? This category violates Wikipedia's POV; for those who care, it places themselves above the judgment of the magisterium and makes a laughing stock out of the episcopate by following a list from College Confidential or the Newman Society. 50.124.12.239 (talk) 17:20, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Template:Footballer edit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Delete; deleted by CactusWriter (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:20, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Footballer (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

This is an attempt to create an article in the template namespace and as such serves no function as a template. Content is the same as that of Daniel Nedelchev. Super Mario Man 17:00, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.