Talk:Pope Benedict XVI/Archive 5

message: This guy is Constantly vandalising. Whether it be putting editing out his title, or calling him a nazi. It needs to be adressed somehow, he is hindering the effort to repair the article. Rangeley 02:31, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  4.35.155.182 

message: Site with BenedictXVI name
Probably not relevant, but someone had created this URL.
*But hey, I commend this guy for doing this. Zscout370 20:03, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Paul VI was the pope who made Ratzinger both a bishop and a cardinal.  That would have been a perfectly plausible name.  Pius XII, Pius XI, Pius X, Pius IX, Pius VIII, and Pius VII all took the names of quite recent popes - Pius XII and Pius VII named themselves after their immediate predecessor, XI, X, IX, and VIII after their most recent predecessor but one.  It should also be noted that the names John and Paul had not been used for several centuries before their revival in the second half of the twentieth century.  A name like Clement (or Gregory, used in the nineteenth century) would seem plausible enough. john k 06:21, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://www.BenedictXVI.com 

message: I added a copywrite, as it is from AP. I am unsure if this is all that needs to be done, and if this picture cannot be in the article I will take it down. Rangeley 04:06, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this An Alright Picture? 

message: Even if this is a minor point I think one should not praise a person more than approbriate. I heard Joseph Ratzinger perform the prelude from Bach's welltempered clavier I No. 1 (not a difficult piece). Apart from the fact that his piano was terribly out of tune he stopped every few bars looking for the correct keys.
--Tarleton 11:18, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: musical abilities

message: I hate to be stubborn (borderline anal) on this, but sign all entries with four tildes ~~~~. I am getting tired for telling yall this, and I still see a couple posts without them. Zscout370 16:22, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Signatures 

message: Should their be information on the pope's E-mail Address? --Contrib 18:14, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  E-mail Address 

message: One article is one top of the same one. When will the constent vandalism stop? --Contrib 18:44, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extra article and constent vandalism 

message: Okay...hello everyone.  Two days ago there was a nasty edit war about the picture on the front page of this article.  I didnt think about it at the time, but there were certain violations of the Three revert rule.  I might have been one of them, but who knows.  Anyway- after all that happened, a vote was held to which at least 5 or 6 people responded.  It was agreed that the "face front" picture wasnt very flattering and that another picture should be used.  Since then, two more photos have been posted which looked good.  NOW- the same photo that was removed tow days ago is back up on the front page  Will this madness never end.  I thbik there might be one or two users who keep on putting it up there, but ALOT of people have said they dont like it as the Pope looks rather cold and stern.  I will not change it again to avoid another edit war.  But, lets just agree on one picture and stick with it.  In my opinion, the picture up there right now shouldn't be it. -Husnock 20:56, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture Wars 

message: One article is one top of the same one. When will the constent vandalism stop? --Contrib 18:44, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I was told it was, but I would not rule that possibility out. Zscout370 20:11, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm certain the article duplication is a problem of people trying to edit simultaneously. I've had it happen to me before (though not on this article). I think what happens is that if someone makes an edit between the time you start editing and the time you click the "save page" button, it spits you back to the old version and you think you're editing a section when you're actually editing the whole article, or something along those lines. I'm not exactly sure what happens, but it definitely is a byproduct of concurrent editing.Kevin M Marshall 20:54, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: This should be reported to administrators and/or developers. --Eleassar777 20:56, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: What happens is, if you edit a SECTION, then click Save Page, if a conflict occurs, the editor brings up the document with the section duplicated, so then the user re-edits and re-saves and the posted change has the duplicated content. Whig 21:03, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplication 

message: The quote originally used took the meaning of his quote out of context. He did not talk about 'homosexuality'. He talked about the inclination of the 'homosexual person' and personalised the attack to imply that it was the inclination of each gay person, not the physical act of gay sex, that was an 'intrinsic moral evil'. Don't tone down this repulsive bigot's views by suggesting that he was talking theoretically about homosexuality or about sex acts when he made the attack personally on each gay person's identity. I've used the full quote, not the out-of-context version used here that disguised its personal nature. FearÉIREANN 21:36, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it is helpful to use terms like "repulsive bigot" in trying to establish a NPOV. Whig 21:45, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Homosexuality 

message: Can the Name field be made to say "Birth Name"? Whig 21:42, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: I've changed the footnotes and references structure to match that of Wikipedia:Footnote3. If you add or remove footnotes or references to external links, please try to keep the structure the same. Fortunately, with the new system, one doesn't need to go through and change every number when one wants to add in a new reference: you just give the  a unique name and slot the  into the correct position within the numbered list at the bottom. Thanks, — Asbestos | Talk 22:19, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnotes and references 

message: I've added his style in English as "His Holiness" after his official Latin style in order to forestall recurring changes of his official title. I hope this edit is considered appropriate Wiki convention. Whig 22:38, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style 

message: One article is one top of the same one. When will the constent vandalism stop? --Contrib 18:44, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I was told it was, but I would not rule that possibility out. Zscout370 20:11, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm certain the article duplication is a problem of people trying to edit simultaneously. I've had it happen to me before (though not on this article). I think what happens is that if someone makes an edit between the time you start editing and the time you click the "save page" button, it spits you back to the old version and you think you're editing a section when you're actually editing the whole article, or something along those lines. I'm not exactly sure what happens, but it definitely is a byproduct of concurrent editing.Kevin M Marshall 20:54, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: This should be reported to administrators and/or developers. --Eleassar777 20:56, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: What happens is, if you edit a SECTION, then click Save Page, if a conflict occurs, the editor brings up the document with the section duplicated, so then the user re-edits and re-saves and the posted change has the duplicated content. Whig 21:03, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplication 

message: I've changed the footnotes and references structure to match that of Wikipedia:Footnote3. If you add or remove footnotes or references to external links, please try to keep the structure the same. Fortunately, with the new system, one doesn't need to go through and change every number when one wants to add in a new reference: you just give the  a unique name and slot the  into the correct position within the numbered list at the bottom. Thanks, — Asbestos | Talk 22:19, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnotes and references 

message: The article currently has the statement: "This is a sharp contrast with the school of thought represented by Karl Rahner, Hans Küng, and Edward Schillebeeckx." Do these individuals share a common school of thought and if so, can it be identified by some name that can point elsewhere in the Wikipedia? Whig 22:51, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Catholic Schools of Thought