Talk:Bartholomew the Apostle

message: I'm removing this link as it really has nothing to do with Bartholomew beyond the mere coincidence of his name.  May as well put the Bart Simpson link back in.
Jumbo 18:49, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre

message: For American English, we say "Bartholomew (learned); Bart, Barto (vernacular)". Bart is roughly equally so in the UK, I would think, including referring to a church or hospital as "St. Bart's". "Barto" I've never heard in my life, what is the basis for this? - Jmabel | Talk 06:35, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 3 days, no answer, removed "Barto". - Jmabel | Talk 18:51, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Barto? 

message: Where is the city of Albanopolis today? Is it in Armenia, Turkey, or somewhere else? -- Clevelander 19:00, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Albanopolis

message: I think there needs to be some specific explanation of how Bartholemew is alleged to have been killed and what the motivation was. There are several indirect references to his martyrdom and Armenian traditions, but it is never fully explained. I understand this may be partly because there is no concrete evidence for how or why it took place, but this does not preclude us from creating a section which outlines the best estimations of what happened. Personally, I read the article looking specifically to find this information and was left more confused than I started. Blankfrackis 19:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Can someone write what "tradition" claims? --Eddylyons (talk) 20:26, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Death and Martyrdom

message: Why is it that Ptolemy directly contradicts the meaning given here and has no reference to furrows or ploughmen? 199.91.34.33 (talk) 18:44, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: this site: http://www.ucatholic.com/saints/saint-bartholomew/  gives a different explanation and has it come from Bar Talmai (ref in II Sam 3:3) --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 14:45, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: The miracle section seems completely anecdotal and is missing all of its sources; also, they do not apply to Saint Bartholomew himself but rather images of him. I'm not an expert on saints so there's not a lot I can do. Anybody up to fixing it a bit? -Lamarcus (talk) 00:20, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miracles? 

message: Is there a neutral reliable source for the claim that he was crucified in Baku. I'm afraid the calendar for the Baku church are neither neutral or reliable. As such, I removed the info per WP:Fringe. VartanM (talk) 18:01, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The existence of the Russian-period church, proven through old images of it, would seem to be proof of the existence of this local belief. The question is, is it notable enough to be included unless we start mentioning other, similar, local claims? For example, for his association with Armenia, the St. Bartholomew monastery near Bashkale contained alleged relics and the nearby church of Soradir contained what was claimed to be his gridle. However, as as been pointed out on the talk page, the article doesn't contain a clear explanation of how or where or under what circumstances Bartholemew died. Meowy 14:38, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no proof that St. Bartholomew was killed in Baku. It is just a belief of orthodox Christians in Baku, and was presented not as a fact, but the point of view of the Russian orthodox church in Baku. The reference was made to their website. I don't really see a reason why this fact cannot be mentioned here. If there are other places where a similar local tradition exists, they can be mentioned too.--Grandmaster 19:40, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My problem is not with the legend, but the source. If you can find a reliable source to confirm it, you are more than welcome to re add the info. VartanM (talk) 23:42, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The source is the website of Baku Eparchy of the Russian orthodox church. The views expressed there belong to that organization. Why is it unreliable to support the statement about the views of orthodox Christians in Baku? Grandmaster 04:37, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

text: I agree with Grandmaster about this. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 08:55, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baku 

message: Can anyone read this? 
It goes like 'Nomme Praxitees
??imarc' Finxi Agrat'
SyP (talk) 14:11, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  caption 

message: undecided after 14 days Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Bartholomew the Apostle → Bartholomew — The apostles here are all the sole or primary meaning of "Saint Name", the first is also the primary meaning of Bartholomew.  See a defeated move request for Saint Andrew for a recent discussion.  The remaining apostles are not the primary meaning of "Saint Name".
* Jude the Apostle → Saint Jude
* Matthew the Evangelist → Saint Matthew
* Matthias the Apostle → Saint Matthias
PatGallacher (talk) 18:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

text: It would be much better if it were just "Apostle X" ... since they are known that way, and you don't have to figure out what their "titles" were (ie. "the Evangelist"), and you don't have to figure out which "Saint X" is which. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 15:08, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

text: I am genuinely unsure by what you meant by the second sentence in the last contribution.  You could be proposing a change in the naming conventions for saints, if so it should be raised there.  I don't necessarily disagree with the last sentence, but that's a separate issue. PatGallacher (talk) 15:54, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

text: But this proposal only applies to those Apostles who are already the sole or primary meaning of "Saint Name".  Is "Apostle Peter" or "Peter the Apostle" really more comprehensible than "Saint Peter"? PatGallacher (talk) 21:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Outside of those Churches that canonize or otherwise highly revere saints, yes:  "Apostle Peter" or "Peter the Apostle" really more comprehensible than "Saint Peter". However, you picked the one case among the apostles where Saint can likely be justified even on the basis of colloquiums such as "Saint Peter at the Pearly Gates." Except possibly for Peter, I submit that the answer to your question concerning the other apostles is a clear yes. If one searches for "Saints," there is a huge list. If one searches for "Apostles," there is a short list. Bartholomew is one the lesser known among The Twelve. But what is his "claim to fame," his most important distinction? Was it his sainthood by Catholics or his selection by Jesus as an Apostle? Most Protestants and many others couldn't care less about canonization and don't recognize it as being valid. Apostleship, especially of the original Twelve, is recognized and highly honored by virtually all adherents of the Christian faith. If I understand your proposal, you suggest dropping "the Apostle" off of Bartholomew. Is that correct? I don't understand why. Perhaps I miss your point. Please clarify for me "this proposal only applies to those Apostles who are already the sole or primary meaning of 'Saint Name. Thanks. ─AFA Prof01 (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

text: I agree with User:PatGallacher (who forgot to sign his post above). Saint Bartholomew's sainthood doesn't matter (it's a red herring). What matters is the subjects common name in the English language. This article should use the most common name of the subject, which the average reader will use and recognize: it is Saint Bartholomew, and not Bartholomew the Apostle. Flamarande (talk) 23:44, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: If the conclusion is that Portuguese sailors are not referring to the apostle then that distinction could be made clear.Peter (talk) 12:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  a reference should probably be made to Saint Bartholomew, the patron saint of sailors (esp. in Portugal) 

message: So is Jonson's comedy really notable enough for mention in the header?
And is the Coptic feast date important enough to be in the header? Neither the Eastern nor Western feast dates are given in the header.
Rwflammang (talk) 16:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say no on Jonson, and it should be put in the body of the text. And the leads for most saints' articles include feasts days of the person, so I'll just add the RC and Orthodox feast days. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 23:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heading 

message: I undid Filll's edit because it re-introduced honourifics and made the lead messy and less professional-looking. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 23:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Reversion

message: Nathanael or Nathaniel? Even if both are attested and used by different authors, there ought to be some sort of note about that. As it is, the article switches between spellings with no notice or explanation. --Khajidha (talk) 20:23, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling 

message: In the relics section, it states "Some of Bartholomew's skull was transferred to the Frankfurt Cathedral, while an arm is venerated in Canterbury Cathedral today." Is there any evidence for his arm being currently held in Canterbury Cathedral? It is said it was taken there 1,000 years ago, but is there any evidence it's still there? Mesdale (talk) 08:07, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: His Arm 

message: I have just posted yesterday add text to the churches dedicated to this great Apostle and în case I did something wrong I repeat the adding:
In Brasov city there is still standing since 1230 the only one Transylvanian old Church with this Patron.  It towers over a former medieval Szekler guard house and  quarters.  They say was founded before 1200 by Cistercian Order chased away later on and taken over by the Saxon settlers about 1270.
It is documentary mentioned that about 1458 the famous Hungarian Prince "Vlad 
Tzepess Dracula" who reigned these Transylvanian territories impaled on the little hill and quarry near by , forty Saxon craft-leaders. They were afterwards flayed just like St. Bartholomew. And this is not a myth ..
 Krausser Diana-Bertha (talk) 16:16, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  St Bartholomew in Transylvania  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bartholomew the Apostle. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090324084209/http://www.vatican.va:80/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2006/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20061004_it.html to http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2006/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20061004_it.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:03, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Should this article point out that Saint Bartholomew's Day, August 24, was traditionally seen as the beginning of autumn? Vorbee (talk) 06:35, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Saint Bartholomew's Day

message: I think the various names of Bartholomew in the first sentence of the lede should be put into a footnote to enhance readability. Currently, it spans four lines. 
See MOS:FULLNAME for this convention. Also see Saint Peter or Paul the Apostle for examples. TheLonelyPather (talk) 15:58, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The various names of Bartholomew in the first sentence of the lede