Talk:Pope Benedict XVI/Archive 17

message: Whether you agree or not, this syllabus documentates positively the many contradictory beliefs Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) has with the traditional Magisterium of the Popes. Please include this in the external links:
http://www.patrickpollock.com/101heresiesofbenedictxvi.html
Nope. Doesn't belong there. It is doubtful if it belongs here either. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 21:06, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  101 Heresies of Antipope Benedict XVI 

message: Hang on! The article obfuscates the instruction concerning this headline with penalties against the actual  crime of the Child sex abuse . I (!) find this serious -don't you ? I am presently asking user:Anne Heneghan to re-consider her removal of the penalty for the former "crime" (automatic excommunication)  on the  relevant  CC Sex Abuse  article .
Apart from this minor but serious situation  of inclusion or dis-inclusion or obfuscation, I suggest that the former penalties  are highly revealing and intensely shocking . I do not refer , as it does appear to  be not exctly the same thing, to Confessional confidences here . 
While I'm here , I also reject the removal of Abraham Lehrer to Pius XII. It is illogical , and may be a "maneuver intended to deceive" . EffK 09:05, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Crime of revealing Child Sex Abuse

message: I'm not happy with the current placing of the style box. IMHO the ideal position should be beneath the Infobox, as there is still a lot of empty space, but I don't know how to format this. Help is appreciated. Str1977 10:00, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I also think the position of the style box is horrific. IMHO the box is not needed, the details of how to address the pope one may read in the pope article. There also seem to have been a vote which concluded that the style shall be used in the lead section. I think that would be a much better solution in repect to space. -- scrittore
There was a vote that decided that style boxes were to be used in all royal and papal articles. And yes it is needed. If it isn't there you get edit wars with people fighting over whether you should put His Holiness at the start of the article. So the style box is an standard requirement. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 00:58, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Jtdirl, I agree completely. Is there a way to place it beneath the Infobox where there is space. Str1977 01:08, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I don't think Scrittore's adding a photo was POV - but it certainly was not an improvement. I have reinserted the original "JPII+B16" photo again. Str1977 01:10, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Sorry you misunderstood me. I wasn't saying that Scrittore POVed the article, just that an article that is top heavy with images that aren't needed either for layout reasons or for newsworthiness, can make an article look too fawning. In an extreme case, for example, someone filled the Margaret Thatcher with images lately, and made it look as though this was Thatcheropedia and that the article should have been captioned: Thatcher: Our Hero. Too many Ben images could have the same effect. It was no doubt a genuine edit, but just pushed the section visually a little too pro-Pope Benedict. We are not meant under NPOV to be pro- or anti- him. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 01:17, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Style box

message: User:199.43.32.67: Addition of this section has been reverted twice. Please discuss here before adding it again. The fact that someone can manipulate a photograph of Pope Benedict XVI to look like Emperor Palpatine is simply irrelevant. --Elliskev 19:55, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pop culture section 

message: I don't like the old one. Neither Ratzinger nor JP II are looking good at it. I see no problem that Ratzinger is posing similarly with JP I, rather continuity.
:The photo (JP II & Ratzinger 1978), is great. The (then) new (264th) Pope & the future (265th) Pope. GoodDay 22:47, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  image with JPII 

message: Since the Dean of the College of Cardinals has the duty to ask the Pope-elect, if he accepts his election & Ratzinger couldn't perform this duty as he WAS the Pope-elect. The person who did ask Ratzinger if he would accept his election (I assume, the Vice-Dean Angelo Sodano asked Ratzinger), should be mentioned. Does anyone agree/disagree? GoodDay 23:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Angelo Sodano

message: I have set up History of the Papacy which needs development. Jackiespeel 15:15, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Article development