Talk:Jose Advincula
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
Tautology edit
When an organization releases something through normal communications channels, there is no need for Wikipedia to say it did so "officially", because that is the default way it happens. Now, if a document or item is under embargo, or confidential, and it is leaked to the public in some way, that is unofficial, and a distinction can be drawn according to reliable secondary sources. But when you say the official organization officially released something, that's a tautology. Elizium23 (talk) 03:55, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Coat of Arms edit
The section on the coat of arms appears to me to be excessive and is given WP:UNDUE weight. Half of the article is about his coat of arms. The article is about Advincula, not his coat of arms. This level of detail is not, in my opinion, necessary nor desirable. Maybe a sentence or two with a cite that provides further information or putting a link in the external links section would be adequate. 108.56.139.120 (talk) 19:50, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion edit
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
.png){kind=link}
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:52, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion edit
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:39, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion edit
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
.jpg){kind=link}
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:07, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion edit
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:22, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion edit
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:37, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion edit
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:22, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
Removed reference to/clarified Cardinal Advincula's afiiliation to the Order of Preachers edit
Prior to today, the article mentions that Cardinal Advincula is a professed member of the Order of Preachers. But looking at the sources cited, they mention that what really happened is that he joined two different priestly fraternities under the auspices of the Dominican order.
This is not the same thing as being being a member of the religious order itself. The original interpretation of the sources ("is a member of the OP") implies that he entered a Dominican seminary and was ordained as a religious priest (when, in fact, he entered a diocesan seminary and was ordained a diocesan bishop). What really happened here is that he joined societies of apostolic life which, loosely speaking, would be like him joining a club of priests who want to adhere to the rules of St. Dominic. A similar case would be a lay person joining the Secular Franciscan Order os only allowed to say he or she is a member of the SFO, but cannot claim to be a fully professed Franciscan friar or nun.
Accordingly, I revised the article to remove or revise interpretations that would imply Cardinal Advincula is a fully-professed Dominican. --- Tito Pao (talk) 13:26, 3 July 2023 (UTC)