Talk:Saint Faro
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
WikiProject class rating
editThis article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 08:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Naming
editOn the principle of avoiding "Saint" in titles wherever reasonable, I'm inclined to move this to the subject's name: Burgundofaro. Thoughts? Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:13, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think Faro would be more common than Burgundofaro, but you are right about the saint-thing. johanthon 15:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Normally, I would have the title minus the "Saint" part. In this case, however, Faro is an extensive disambiguation page that we shouldn't get rid off, as there are multiple uses for the word "Faro." So moving it to Burgondofaro would be a good solution, although the name is less common. --Polylerus (talk) 20:46, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
"is canonized"
edit"is recognized" would be better as there was no "canonization" process at the time. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 12:27, 28 October 2016 (UTC)