Talk:Pope Benedict XVI/Archive 16

message: This is inappropriate for several reasons, the key ones being:
* Not Wikipedia policy
* Trickle-down effect - by specifically prohibiting vandalism on this one page, vandalism of other pages is implicitly endorsed
* Insignificant effect on vandals
* Waste of bandwith --84.9.88.149 15:03, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe this action was taken before on articles such as George W Bush. However, I will address you points. While people who want to vandalize will still vandalize, even if we lock the article, the talk page will still be vandalized. While bandwith is not a problem, I still think it would be pointless to have the warning. I will, suggest, that if any person who comes across this in the Recent Changes should put this article on their watch list so vandalism could be reverted quickly and swiftly. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 19:04, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh - I think you're in agreement with me, actually ;) - If I didn't make myself clear, I'm against the anti-vandal warning. But can't do anything about it for a bit thanks to DJ Clayworth's jobsworth application of the three revert rule (I don't belive it to apply as different people were doing the reversions, but it's a moot point now...)  --84.9.88.149 23:00, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Personally, not much discussion took place over here. The creator of the style box came to my talk page asking for it's approval and use. I said I had no problems with it. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 20:14, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The pope is a reigning sovereign monarch.  The standard is clearly established that royals, monarchs and nobles are referred to by their honorific title in the beginning of the article (as a minimum) - see the main entries for Queen Elizabeth II and members of the British royal family, as well as for the royal family of Nepal.  Certainly the monarch of Vatican City State should be afforded the same courtesy here at wikipedia - after all over 180 nations have diplomatic relations with the Vatican and afford him that courtesy.  To do otherwise is to single popes out for special - lesser - treatment because some people don't like the fact that the Catholic Church's leaders is also a sovereign monarch of a city-state with influence both the secular and religious sphere.  The Vatican invented the diplomatic corps and even today the ambassador from the Holy See in most countries is given the courtesy of being the ranking ambassador due to this fact.  64.110.90.2 07:16, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Well, we already know about the Palpatine problem, and personally, warning or not, people will just do it. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 23:02, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Here's your reason: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Honorific_prefixes.  Also see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (biographies)/Style War proposed solution.  You can also see Use of courtesy titles and honorifics in professional writing for an incomplete list of how honorifics are handled in other organizations.  Now please stop adding it in (and changing the in-article comment noting the compromise).  Lastly, do we really need to add "the UN" to Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not? --Quasipalm 13:44, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Anti-vandal warning

message: I just added a subsection on teachings. The truth is this is a Pope's most important role (aside from celebrating Mass which for Catholic theology is absolutely the most important activity of a priest, much more a Pope). 
Together with a pre-existing paragraph on sexual matters, I added two paragraphs, which I deem as two of the most important paragraphs so far in his papacy:
1) one on jesus Christ himself. Of course, Jesus Christ is the main topic of any teaching in Christianity. So how he deals with this topic is very important. 
2) tyranny of relativism. Very many writers, both Catholic and non-Catholic commentators, have said that Benedict is to relativism and secularism as John Paul II is to communism. He is for fixing the West as John Paul fixed the East. So whatever he says about this is VERY IMPORTANT. 
Later we can come up with some more teachings, but those will have to go to a break-out article. Marax 05:58, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subsection on teachings 

message: Whats benedicts papal motto?? This site  claims it is 'Be CO-workers in the Truth. If this is correct, whats the traduction in latin and were should we put it in the article. <<Coburn_Pharr>> 23:46, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Papal Moto

message: Around the middle of May, we had a long section on election to the papacy.  There was an extract which went like this:
Before his first appearance at the balcony of Saint Peter's Basilica after becoming pope, he was announced by the Jorge Cardinal Medina Estévez, protodeacon of the College of Cardinals. Cardinal Medina Estévez first addressed the massive crowd as "dear(est) brothers and sisters" in Italian, Spanish, French, German and English — each language receiving cheers from the international crowd — before continuing in Latin. He announced the decision with the words: 
 
:Fratelli e sorelle carissimi; queridísimos hermanos y hermanas; bien chers frères et sœurs; liebe Brüder und Schwestern; dear brothers and sisters:
:Annuntio vobis gaudium magnum:
:Habemus Papam!
:Eminentissimum ac Reverendissimum Dominum,
:Dominum Iosephum,
:Sanctæ Romanæ Ecclesiæ Cardinalem Ratzinger,
:qui sibi nomen imposuit Benedicti decimi sexti.
 
Which translates to: 
:Dear brothers and sisters,
:I announce to you a great joy:
:We have a Pope!
:The most Eminent and Reverend Lord,
:the Lord Joseph
:Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church Ratzinger,
:who has taken to himself the name of Benedict the Sixteenth.
At some stage, someone cut that section. I was disappointed, but didn't protest, as the page was already very long, and as I felt that my attachment to that bit might be due to the huge excitement I felt on 19 April — and I realized that the fact that it was an overwhelming moment for me didn't necessarily mean it should go in the encyclopedia.
However, I have noticed recently that that section (Election) looks a bit unprofessional, because there are three photos plus Jtdirl's styles box, and not enough text to balance — so there's a big gap in the page. What would anyone feel about having the Habemus Papam reinserted?  Alternatively does anyone have the technical knowledge to reformat those pictures, so as to avoid the blank parts of the the page? Perhaps some photos could be resized, or even moved, and I'm sure the styles box could go to another part of the page. (But I would prefer to have Habemus Papam back again . . .)  Ann Heneghan (talk) 22:34, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I say to add it.  It is certainly more relevant to Pope Benedict XVI than the other arguments that have been on this talk page.  Robert McClenon 22:47, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I've added it, but if others object strongly, I'll be prepared to revert myself or have someone else revert me. I agree with Patsw above that not everything that's accurate should be reported in an encyclopedia. I also moved the styles box up higher. I'm not entirely happy with the look of where it is now, but I think it's better than where it was. Further modifications would be welcome. Ann Heneghan (talk) 23:23, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As was pointed out at the time by the user who removed it, the whole "Habemus Papam" pronouncement is a routine formula used at all papal elections, and so is of little interest or relevance to this particular election. It is given in the Papal election article - at most, a reference to that article might be justified here, not wholesale replication. (The only distinctive aspect to the pronouncement for B16 was the multi-lingual "brothers and sisters" introduction.) Vilcxjo 00:16, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: For accuracy you might want to watch a video replay and insert all the ellipses where there were unusually long pauses on the part of the Cardinal for dramatic effect.  He probably was aware at the time that this might be the only time in his life that there would be a million cameras and microphones pointed at him. patsw 01:27, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Yes, it's a routine formula used at all papal elections, but that doesn't mean it's of little interest. Before television was invented, it would have been seen only by the crowds in St Peter's Square. And Pope John Paul's reign was so long, that many of our readers weren't even born at the time he was elected. For many people, the election of a pope is far more exciting than the crowning of a new king, etc. Everyone knew when George VI died that he would be succeeeded by Elizabeth II; there was no suspense. In this case, millions of people were watching in suspense, so I think that particular moment deserves a fuller coverage. I admit that I'm using the fact that there wasn't enough text to balance the pictures as an partial justification for putting it back in. Have you any other suggestions about how to get rid of those big gaps in the page where there are pictures at the side but no text in the main body? Thanks for the link to Papal election. I notice that links to Habemus Papam.  Ann Heneghan (talk) 08:50, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Hi, Transf1o, I don't think it was a "previous consensus"; it was just a previous edit. Somebody removed it, and – as far as I remember – nobody commented either to agree or disagree. Sometimes things are slow here, and nobody seems to be editing or commenting, and sometimes the article changes so quickly that you can easily loose track of the changes. Anyway, I'm interested to see what others think. Ann Heneghan (talk) 03:16, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I suggest we keep the Habemus papam text, and I also strongly oppose removing the image with Sodano. 83.109.166.58 01:31, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Election - Habemus Papam 

message: With hang-ups on sexuality separating the left and right, I would like to find some common ground here.  Has anyone any thoughts on asexual candidates for Holy Orders?  I think the ideal candidate would be chaste and holy, and free from genitalia of any sort.  Aloysius Patacsil 01:48, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: A Modest Proposal

message: This talk page reverts to the subject in question (ie BXI). The Catholic church's attitudes towards various sexual and other positions (if you will accept the pun) belongs to a separate page - and there should be a brief mention on the main BVI page about *his* particular attitudes towards such matters. Most people find other people's slanging matches (anyone care to create a page on that?) boring at the very least.
:Sorry to bore you, but
:# this is a talk page -- so expect some talking.
:# all of the topics above do deal directly with Benedict XVI (at least at first) before they go off-topic.
:# you don't have to read it -- so there's no reason for you to be bored.
:# Benedict XVI is now the monarch of the Church, so his personal views and the views of the church should be nearly identical.  As such, these discussions are well placed.
:# Please sign your talk page entires with --~~~~
:--Quasipalm 15:19, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Another modest proposal

message: I just added one of the most important texts (if not the most important) of Benedict XVI on the most important battle he is waging, which is the battle against secularism in the West. Hope you like it. It's one of the most beautiful he has written and one of the most logical thing that strikes at the very root of the issue. Moreover, it shows his view of the religion of which is the leader. Lafem 02:47, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added teaching on Christianity as Religion According to Reason