This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford 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.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
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 articles
Johnsoniensis : There are many thousands of MOS errors in Wikipedia articles and it is part of a good editor's job to correct them when known and noticed. This is what I do and so should you. Afterwriting (talk) 11:21, 27 April 2020 (UTC)Reply
It is not useful for editors to tell other editors what they should do; some editors may specialise in applying the manual of style but other kinds of work are also useful. As there is no infobox in this case why does "The Very Rev." need to be deleted?--Johnsoniensis (talk) 19:30, 27 April 2020 (UTC)Reply
Because it is not useful to ignore the MOS. Style consistency is very important and all articles should normally be written only according to what the MOS states or allows rather than editors' personal preferences or idiosyncracies. Without this the whole Wikipedia project would be a complete mess. With only a few particular exceptions the MOS explicitly states that in biographical articles the subject's styles or titles, not just those of clergy, are not to be included before their names in the opening sentence. There are many articles on Anglican clergy started by an editor who is constantly churning out sloppily written articles about them which often also include many MOS problems. This is one of the articles he started. Afterwriting (talk) 00:35, 28 April 2020 (UTC)Reply