Talk:Pope Benedict XVI/Archive 11

message: With the addition of a streamlined Pope infobox on all the papal articles, is there really a need for those in-the-way looking succession boxes at the very end of the article.  That same information is more prominently displayed already in the Pope infobox.  --Gerald Farinas 19:38, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Succession boxes

message: I have crated the article Wikipedia:Oh my God! You Deleted Bad Jokes and Other Nonsense! You bastard!/Pope Benedict XVI. All vandals can go and play there. Salleman 02:20, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  To Emperor Palpatine vandals 

message: I believe the following is not verifiable, in 2005 moot, and the quote doesn't give you enough context to evaluate the intent of the speaker.
:According to Catholic News Service, "One bishop who is well informed on the issue and asked not to be named said the secrecy demanded by the new norms gives the appearance of a 'cover-up' by the church." www.americamagazine.org/catholicnews.cfm?articleTypeID=29&textID=1352&issueID=355
The complete paragraph
:One bishop who is well informed on the issue and asked not to be named said the secrecy demanded by the new norms gives the appearance of a "cover-up" by the church. He said the norms were too legalistic and ignored the pastoral needs raised by pedophilia cases. He questioned whether victims would find an all-priest tribunal an acceptable forum. Those close to the Vatican in Rome, however, said the new norms do not rule out pastoral initiatives by bishops, and they defended secrecy in such cases, saying it was needed to protect the accuser and the accused.
First of all, the Vatican did not "cover-up" nor give the appearance of a "cover-up" in the promulgation and implementation of the  Sacramentorum Sanctitatis.  Rather as other articles on this point out, rather
than a cover-up, this clarified that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is responsible for offenses against the Eucharist (such as sacrilege, flagrant liturgical abuse, or unauthorized concelebration); offenses against the sacrament of Penance (such as absolving a partner in adultery soliciting sexual favors from penitents, or violating the confessional seal); and abuse of children. In all such cases, bishops are expected to report accusations directly to Rome for adjudication.
We can't verify who had the opinion this was a "cover-up" and I think the quote doesn't add anything that the rest of the text doesn't already include.  In 2005, we know that the 2001 procedures mentioned here have worked effectively to deal with the laicization of priests when their cases get referred to Rome.  There's been no cover-up in Rome when a bishop has presented a case to the CDF.
I present two choices: replace the "cover-up" sentence with the complete paragraph from the Catholic News Service, or delete it as being unverifiable and redundant to the rest of this section. patsw 20:40, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anonymous Source; Moot; Not in context 

message: This Wikipedia uses a number of fair use images. However, for other Wikipedias which do not accept fair use, it is extremely difficult to find images of the Pope, with only one or two very mediocre being available. We should ask professional photographers or agencies to donate a couple of images of the Pope to Wikipedia under a license which make it possible to use for other Wikipedias. There are so many beautiful images of him taken.
:Out of the question for the Associated Press and Reuters.  They want Wikipedia to purchase a license if it wants to use its images.  --Gerald Farinas 19:22, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There are some Images at :Commons:Benedictus XVI, I hope we can get some Images as a pope at the World Youth Day 2005. -83.129.61.171 01:00, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

text: I'll pass on that one. Plus, I had a picture request listed here for a while, but it has been fulfiled. I removed the notice, but others are welcome to stick it back on here. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 02:14, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: There have been some reverts over whether to use the German title or the English translation in the succession box no. 1.
I don't have a great preference in this, though I guess most Wikipedians would prefer the English, as this is the English Wiki, not the German.
However, in either case it should be correct language and "Biskop" is not an extisting German word. It's "Bischof" and in this case "Erzbischof" (written as one word) - also then the preposition ("von" instead of "of") and the place names ("München" instead of "Munich")should be in German.
Anyway, I posted a correct German version and then immediately a English version. Others might choose between the two.
Str1977 21:02, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  German or English 

message: I have resubmitted this article for featured status, see Wikipedia:Featured article candidates. 83.109.188.50 01:19, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Featured

message: Could whomever keeps inserting The Servant of God before John Paul II's name in the succession box please stop doing so. Those boxes are only there to link an office or title holder to their predecessor and successor. They are not intended to contain any titles, styles, or other terms that are not in themselves part of their name or regnal name. Servant of God should no more be in that box than should His Holiness, His Eminence, Venerable, Blessed or any other designation that is not part of the person's name or regnal name. Such designations belong in the text of the article where they can be explained and contextualised. Added in succession boxes where they cannot be explained or contextualised, they can be misread as indicating that Wikipedia is endorsing a POV. Benedict's predecessor was John Paul II and so that is all that should be in the box. Apart from anything else, he was not a Servant of God during his lifetime so should not be referred to as such when his regnal name is being used as a link. FearÉIREANN(talk) 21:29, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've put in an invisible ,  referring editors back to Talk.  Maybe that will work.  Ann Heneghan 22:28, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. Thanks. FearÉIREANN(talk) 22:45, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Succession box 

message: Most Tyroleans have Italian ancestors somewhere along their family lines, especially South Tyroleans.
:It may well be that he has Italian-speaking ancestors aswell, I believe the population of the area is quite mixed. (Note also that parts of the North Italian population are actually of Germanic origin).
::Umm...Marktl is not exactly located in Tyrol. While it's theoretically possible that there were some Italian ancestors a couple genetarions back, you don't get much more Bavarian than Ratzinger's family :) -- Ferkelparade π 13:48, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Please look at the biography. The person meant is his mother Maria, whose family were from South Tyrol. 83.109.128.127 19:22, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

text: Most Tyroleans have Italian ancestors? Do you know that as a fact? Gugganij 10:33, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Would he technically count as Italian aswell?

message: We need to expand the lead section slightly to meet the criterias for this article becoming featured. The length should be approximately that of Pope John Paul II. I've made an attempt to expand the section, improvements are very welcome. 83.109.128.127 19:24, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead section