This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Guild of Copy Editors This article was copy edited by BDD, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 2 July 2012.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles Orders, decorations, and medals Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Orders, decorations, and medals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of orders, decorations, and medals 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.Orders, decorations, and medalsWikipedia:WikiProject Orders, decorations, and medalsTemplate:WikiProject Orders, decorations, and medalsOrders, decorations, and medals articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Catholicism Mid‑importance Orders, decorations, and medals of the Holy See is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Catholicism task list: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : see Draft articles Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page) Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

	Orders, decorations, and medals of the Holy See was a History good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result August 29, 2012 Good article nominee Not listed

Okay, it's a dumb question but I still have to ask it.

Does the holder of a Papal Order of Chivalry have the right to be addressed as Sir (Christian Name) (Surname). For example was Michael Williams, Sir Michael Williams? Avalon 09:50, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not a dumb question. I came here to ask precisely the same question, because I've just been looking at Gilbert Levine's article, where he's now apparently known as "Sir Gilbert Levine" because of a papal knighthood. There are various external links that use the same title. I have to say these sound very odd to me. I've never previously heard of a papal knight being referred to as "Sir". -- JackofOz 04:07, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update. There's a discussion at Talk:Gilbert Levine about the fact that he's become known as "Sir Gilbert Levine". Some of us are trying to make the point that papal knighthoods do not carry any such pro-nominal title; while others are arguing that Benedict XVI has spoken and his word is law. If anyone can help settle the issue, please come over and join us. -- JackofOz (talk) 07:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, Gilbert Levine can be "knight" or "chevalier", but he cannot be "Sir" because only Queen of UK can make from "ordinary" man "Sir". Pope dońt have power to ennoble somebody in UK without consent of the Queen and vice versa, the Queen don't have power to ordain bishop. Yes, pope can ennoble in Rome anybody and the Queen appoints bishops, but there is difference. Yopie 11:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yopie (talk • contribs)

Thanks. I've made reference to your post at Talk:Gilbert Levine. Cheers. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yopie is correct in that a Papal knighthood does not allow an individual to be called "Sir." However it is not because the Pope does not possess such power but merely that most European countries and the Vatican perfer to use the term "Chevalier." Indeed, the title of "Sir" is used mainly in Great Britain relating to knighthoods given by the Queen. However, fellow knights in addressing each other (example the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem) often use the title of Sir. This means John Smith is referred to as Sir John Smith. This again is only used in private correspondences between knights. Royalhistorian (talk) 05:49, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any sovereign entity, especially such a legitimate one as the Vatican, can bestow titles, and by definition, they are knights, however by the nature of the order per the vatican website "is to serve the Catholic Church...the Order is not to become a member of a prestigious organisation in order to boast of one’s status or acquire personal benefits and advantages." They would be rarely seen outside of a sanctioned function and only display the emblem when acting in an official capacity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.113.70.189 (talk) 05:25, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Order of the Holy Sepulchre Main article: Order of the Holy Sepulchre

'In 1907 Pope Pius X reserved the post of Grand Master for the Pope, thus giving the Order the status of a papal order. However, in 1949, he decreed that the Grand Master would be a cardinal appointed by the Pope and serving during the Pope's pleasure or until such time as the cardinal may wish to lay down this office.'

Given that Pius X passed to his maker in 1914, how did he communicate his decree of 1949? Speaking ex cathedra is one thing, ex sepulcrum another! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.185.105.161 (talk) 10:28, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article was flagged as a copyright problem on April 4. Checking verifies that the content was entered into Wikipedia without any indication of permission in 2005, here. It was merged into this article here. It was published on the internet a full eight years prior to its placement here. ([1])

Unless we are able to obtain permission (see WP:IOWN or Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission), this article will need to be rewritten or reverted. Please see Wikipedia:CP#Rewriting content for suggestions. If no rewrite is suggested, the article may be reverted to this point, as it existed prior to the influx of copied content.

Thank you, and I'm very sorry for the complication. :/ Any help you can offer to salvage this article would be appreciated. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:56, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have not personally seen an article with this many problems recover without mass deletion of material or a total rewrite. I took the version of the article that it would have to be reverted back to [2] as the start of a lead. I then took the format of the problem version to use as a framework for rewrite. The work in progress rewrite version is found here: Talk:Papal Orders of Chivalry/Temp.

At this point I am going to proceed with sources from the Vatican and the public domain wikisource:Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Pontifical Decorations. Please note, the PD Catholic Encyclopedia appears around the internet on pages that purport a copyright on this public domain material. Cheers. EricSerge (talk) 18:49, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have created a rewrite of the article at Talk:Papal Orders of Chivalry/Temp. I welcome improvements. So how do we close this mess out and get this article back in the mainspace? EricSerge (talk) 01:25, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Beautifully done. At this point, it was pretty much just a matter of waiting for the listing to come up at WP:CP. We have a bit of a backlog due to a shortage of admins working in the area. I've put your version in the article and deleted the copyvio in history. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:08, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Papal Orders of Chivalry/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Amadscientist (talk · contribs) 09:47, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Failed "good article" nomination

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of August 29, 2012, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Not well written. Redundant usage, confusing wording and main subject is lost. Major focus issues in prose.

2. Factually accurate?: There appears to be an issue with the title of the page itself, referring to this as Papal Orders of Chivalry. It appears no RS can support this naming. These are refered to simply as papal decorations, papal orders etc, but the title of this page is innacurate and could be OR in itself. Large, major chunks of the article are unreferenced.

3. Broad in coverage?: The article lacks breadth of coverage in general. There is a wealth of information and this seems to be almost narrow in direction and yet it loses focus completely in regards to explaining what a papal order is or is for. The article says who gives it, when he gives it and who gets it, but just not why the person recieves it and what it is for. This is in the sources but disregarded in this article.

4. Neutral point of view?: Not neutral. Emphasis on contemporary Vatican perception.

5. Article stability?: No edits since July 20, 2012.

6. Images?: fail. The images are not being maintained or looked at close enough. I fixed the redlink at commons for the deleted page that was linked as the first page for background information on the SVG file on the Feature image but File:Gregoriusorden.jpg needs a summary, source and author information. Too much needed to pass on images.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.--Amadscientist (talk) 17:55, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Orders, decorations, and medals of the Holy See. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for //jvarnoso.com/orders/christ2.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.chivalricorders.org/vatican/christ.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ((Sourcecheck))).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:48, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@IndyMeister: Regarding this. While I see your point of not including this scope in this article, do you intend to move the content scope elsewhere, such as a list inside Category:Catholic chivalric orders, or where do you intend to put it? Order of chivalry doesn't seem to offer the equivalent scope, does it? PPEMES (talk) 12:10, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe parts of both articles can be merged into a new article Catholic chivalric orders. The information would not be lost and context can be provided as well (history, papal approval, obeyence, different branches, ...). Furthermore, such an article could rely on the works of Bander van Duren and might get very extensive. IndyMeister (talk) 07:12, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: category has been renamed to Category:Catholic orders of chivalry. – Fayenatic London 08:05, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]