Template talk:Infobox papal conclave#rfc 6EFE2DB

Shouldn't there be a separate label and data for the presiding Cardinal of the conclave? In the last four conclaves (the 2 conclaves of 1978, the 2005 conclave and the 2013 conclave) neither the Dean nor the Subdean of the College of Cardinals was an elector and therefore neither of them presided over nor voted in the conclave itself and the duty of presiding over the conclave was taken over by another Cardinal Bishop. In the 1978 conclaves, the presiding Cardinal was the most Senior Cardinal Bishop in attendance, Jean Villot who was coincidentally also the Camerlengo but in 2013, the presiding Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re was neither the Dean, Subdean nor Camerlengo and he's not listed as an official in the conclave inbox despite being the presiding Cardinal. --Harvzsf (talk) 21:01, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I think, the label "Sub-dean" should be changed to "Vice-dean" since their official title is "Vice-Dean of the College of Cardinals," not "Sub-Dean of the College of Cardinals." RyanW1995 (talk) 05:29, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

First of all, the secretary is not a cardinal elector, which already contradicts the heading. In addition, the dean and vice-dean are not always eligible to participate. RyanW1995 (talk) 02:46, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

According to Universi Dominici gregis, the junior cardinal deacon closes the door and draws lots, should the junior cardinal deacon be added to the infobox? 207.96.54.137 (talk) 19:08, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose pending citation to reliable sources, which should include reference to specific relevant sections. An exact quotation would be very helpful. The Wikipedia article does not have adequate detail. Sundayclose (talk) 20:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
• :Here’s a source - https://www.ilmessaggero.it/AMP/home/pope_conclave_vatican_rules_benedict-194371.html 207.96.54.137 (talk) 21:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
• :Would you consider the [https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_jp-ii_apc_22021996_universi-dominici-gregis.html Apostolic Constitution] a suitable source? It's a primary source, but I suppose many people would consider canon law to be quite authoritative on the subject. OJH (talk) 22:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
• Rfc header removed – this may continue as a normal discussion. Rfc's are costly in editor resources over a period of a month, and the prerequisites have not been satisfied here. Please continue to discuss your question as a normal Talk page discussion. If, after significant discussion by several editors over some time, you end up deadlocked or no consensus emerges, then you may start another Rfc if you have satisfied WP:RFCBEFORE. {{ec|2}} Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 21:02, 7 May 2025 (UTC)