Talk:Anglican Diocese of Birmingham

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject West Midlands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of West Midlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.West MidlandsWikipedia:WikiProject West MidlandsTemplate:WikiProject West MidlandsWest Midlands
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity: Anglicanism Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism (assessed as Low-importance).

Warwickshire Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Warwickshire, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Warwickshire. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Please also feel free to join in the discussions on the project's talk page.WarwickshireWikipedia:WikiProject WarwickshireTemplate:WikiProject WarwickshireWikiProject Warwickshire
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Worcestershire Low‑importance

	Worcestershire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Worcestershire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Worcestershire-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WorcestershireWikipedia:WikiProject WorcestershireTemplate:WikiProject WorcestershireWorcestershire
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved. Per below, the case is not unambiguous as to the lot and thus cannot be determined in the aggregate. This does not necessarily mean that the requested moves as to some are not warranted but that has not been shown in this larger nomination. These appear to need individual treatment so that the specifics of a particular case can be focused on, where warranted.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:46, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

– Each of these articles on Church of England dioceses are dab'd (with Anglican) from other dioceses (whether they be Catholic and/or foreign). The proposed titles are currently redirects to the current titles (some of which I have pointed there, having ascertained that those were linked to exclusively by pages aiming for the Anglican Dio articles). There are four existing examples of what I propose: Diocese of Lincoln, Diocese of Newcastle, Diocese of Norwich and Diocese of Rochester. This should be reasonably uncontroversial since: all of the counterpart diocesan articles are dab'd (including RC dioceses seem to always be entitled "Roman Catholic Diocese of..."); and all other Church of England dioceses are at undab'd "Diocese of..." (and should be because under English civil law only Church of England dioceses may be referred to undifferentiated). D B D 21:18, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree - never understood why they were changed in the first place. S a g a C i t y (talk) 22:16, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Just because we prepend the Roman Catholic dioceses with "Roman Catholic" does not make the base names unambiguous. Diocese of Birmingham, Diocese of Worcester, and Diocese of Rochester (and probably others but I haven't checked them all) should be disambiguation pages. Powers ^T 23:19, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – I would argue that it means exactly that – and hatnotes are perfectly adequate for dab purposes in these cases. D B D

They would be adequate if the Anglican dioceses were clearly the primary topics for those titles. I see no evidence of that being the case, nor do I think it likely for some of them (like Rochester). Powers ^T 15:12, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose unless an individual case is completely unambiguous—meaning the place, and no other place with the same name, have other dioceses. This seems unlikely. Note that your appeal to English civil law sounds like an WP:ON argument. --BDD (talk) 17:55, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – It was not meant as such an appeal – however, it can be seen as an indicator of common usage. D B D 20:49, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose with caveat - I agree completely that the status quo is wrong. The generic "Dicoese of foo" should be a disambiguation page not a redirect. But if that change doesn't happen, my second choice would be BDD's proposal. WaggersTALK 14:15, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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