Talk:Pope Benedict XVI/Archive 8

message: Not sure when they were removed (I don't have the stamina to go to the history page) but images that came from Reuters or AP need to be credited in the caption to prevent any adverse reaction from those organizations.  I believe we have legitimate fair use claims on the images since they came from the Vatical press pool but we need to have credit on the images where they are used in addition to their pages.
When the page is unprotected It would be nice if they could go back, they were small and unobtrusive so I'm hopeful everyone will agree with their necessity.
--Wgfinley 22:56, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The photos from the press pool we have claimed fair use on, however, if the distributing agency is known we have been crediting it as they still have rights to the distribution.  I've fixed it now so that they're there, again, I made them small and unobtrusive so that we give the credit but it's subtle, I think it's similar to any other site where you would find photo credits properly given.  --Wgfinley 03:35, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo Credits Need To Go Back 

message: From the Vatican website. Zscout370 (talk) 00:14, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 

message: From the Vatican Website, stated on 4/27/2005:"It is with great joy that I welcome you and also greet those following this audience through radio and television. After the holy death of my beloved predecessor, Pope John Paul II, I come before you today for my first General Audience. Filled with sentiments of awe and thanksgiving, I wish to speak of why I chose the name Benedict. Firstly, I remember Pope Benedict XV, that courageous prophet of peace, who guided the Church through turbulent times of war. In his footsteps I place my ministry in the service of reconciliation and harmony between peoples. Additionally, I recall Saint Benedict of Norcia, co-patron of Europe, whose life evokes the Christian roots of Europe. I ask him to help us all to hold firm to the centrality of Christ in our Christian life: May Christ always take first place in our thoughts and actions!" His first General Audience. Zscout370 (talk) 17:00, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Glad that is taken care of. Now, let's see about the arms! Zscout370 (talk) 01:18, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Why didn't he choose a name like Pius MDCCLXXVI? Unless he does some big deeds, he'll be forgotten about half a century after his death. In the series of Roman numerals, you won't be able to tell Benedict III from Benedict VII from Benedict XVI. --WhiteTimberwolf 08:19, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

text: How would naming himself Benedict the 1776th would change that? And BTW, the Pope gets to choose his name, not the ordinal number attached to it for distinguishing purposes. Any irregularities in the numbering is either due to mistakes of historians (like forgetting to number a "John XX") or the problem of anti-popes (two Clemens VII, two John XXIII). First historians included anti-popes in the numbering (which then was strictly confined to history books), but in the 15th century (probably due to the Great Schism) the Popes themselves cared about the numbering, included it into official announcements and refused to acknowledge the numbers of anti-popes, as that might be considered "posthumously legimitizing" them.
Str1977 11:02, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name Selection 

message: The footnotes are driving me nuts. The named ref/note approach is fine; what's needed is a (matching) automatic ordering of both, preferably so that if there are three refs to the same named note, then the note copes with that in a way that avoids needless duplication. eg
*...
*3. bla
*4. blabla
*5,17,74 blablabla
*6,8. er
*7. stuff
*... 
Rd232 11:02, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnotes 

message: Just want to say I like the new picture that matches the color scheme on vatican.va Trödel|talk 14:43, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It is, since I took it from the Vatican website. The image is just a "seat warmer" until we get better, PD/Free Use images of the Holy Father. Zscout370 (talk) 16:22, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Indeed. The currect picture is de facto fair use, as it counts as a promotional image. The same is not necessarily true for other pictures from vatican.va, however. Hopefully a nicer promotional/fair use shot will appear soon. — Asbestos | Talk 22:59, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Or a free image... Especially for Wikipedians from Wikipedias which disallow fair use. Ausir 23:39, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Picture 

message: Dear all,
I feel somewhat uneasy about a lack of distinction between Ratzinger's personal emphasis and stances as a theologian and his pronouncements as head of the CDF. Not that there is a disagreement, but I don't think it appropriate to e.g. list his condemnation of Boff or of female priests as a personal view. This is why I moved these two to the CDF section. But this might be appropriate for other paragraphs as well, e.g. the Homosexuality paragraph (but needs rephrasing to start with statement, not with critics) or the abortion paragraph.
Also, if anyone has greater knowledge about the theological writing of Ratzinger please post it. 
Str1977 10:11, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Church doctrine and personal theology

message: Taken from the article here: Yahoo news article
""When (he) chose the name Benedict XVI, this was seen as fulfilling the prophecy for this pope," wrote one entry on www.wikipedia.org." Dismas 12:15, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article about Pope mentions Wikipedia 

message: The new Pope was welcomed by conservatives/traditionalists, and demonized by "liberals" and some anti-catholic forces in countries like England. Not even all Germans like the new Pope. (Both England and protestant parts of Germany has a history of anti-catholic policies). How does the Poles view their new Holy Father?
:Eastern European Roman Catholics are often considered some of the most conservative in Catholicity. That, in conjunction with the knowledge of Poles that Ratzinger was one of Pope John Paul II's favorites, makes Pope Benedict XVI somewhat popular in Poland. There are always dissident factions, not as large in Poland as it is in industrialized Western countries.  --Gerald Farinas 17:21, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  how is the Pope received in Poland? 

message: Ok, did someone go on a massive deleting spree or what?  Last time I visited this article it had lots of information that is now just completely gone.  Not moved to a new page -- just deleted.  Before this article sounded like a conversation of different ideas, now it looks like catholic literature.  Whoever went on the deleting spree has done Wikipedia a huge disservice.  Please, follow policy and move sub-subjects to new pages and then link to them, don't just delete entire sections.  -Quasipalm 17:15, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The theology section was moved to a sub-page, which was linked earlier at the bottom (but the link was moved when I was waking up). I am not sure what other sections were moved. Zscout370 (talk) 17:47, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mass Deletion 

message: Do you think the main article space could have this section trimmed, since everything is included on the subpage? Thanks. Zscout370 (talk) 17:52, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think so, besides I find his Wehrmacht time completely unremarkable, uninteresting and quite irrelevant for his later career. Andries 18:51, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Yes, I created Early life of Pope Benedict XVI with a view to then summarising the text in the main article. This still needs doing. Rd232 17:58, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early Life Section 

message: Hi, I'm posting this request here because there doesn't seem to be a WikiProject for the Catholic Church.  Apologies for the slightly eccentric nature of the request.
Someone has listed Ernesto Corripio Ahumada for deletion.  Although too old to be eligible for the College of Cardinals, he's a former Primate of Mexico and certainly encyclopedic, though the article when nominated was a single defamatory sentence and I'm not really surprised it got itself listed while it was in that form.  He's an old Vatican insider, and probably significant to the early reign of the last Pope.
I've written a basic stub, but I could still use some help because there are still a number of votes to delete this, and as it stands the article may well get deleted (recreation can be done but is problematic and is best avoided).  Please visit the article (link above).  Help with improving this article would be welcome.  Votes to keep, if you please, would also be welcome, especially from regular editors.
* Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Ernesto Corripio Ahumada
Thanks. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 19:30, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it because there's an article on Ernesto Cardinal Corripio y Ahumada? *snickers* --Gerald Farinas 20:06, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I wonder who was so nice to create that article... ;) -- KTC 21:22, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: VfD and cleanup help needed

message: See 
:Not sure who provided that link, as the person forgot to sign.  Anyway, I recommend visiting that page, as it's a vote for deleting the category [Former members of the Hitler Youth], a category which seems to have been set up for the purpose of putting Pope Benedict into it.  I had a little trouble voting, as my vote did not appear on the page, so I thought something had gone wrong with the submission.  In fact, I needed to click at the top where it says "Purge the cache to refresh this page."  Ann Heneghan 23:21, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: HJ again...

message: Is it just me or is the introduction getting a bit too long and confusing? There are various paragraphs of one or two sentences with a million internal links (making the reading confusing). Really, does anyone need all those links to all kinds of dates and years... Also, there are some pieces of information, that I think are not necessary in the introduction. Example:
"According to CNN, Ratzinger has condemned communism by calling the Soviet Union "a shame of our time", and capitalism by saying, "We must coordinate the free market with the sense of responsibility of one towards the other." [3]"
I didn't want to start cutting the intro up, at least not before knowing if others think the same. But really, is the pope's opinion on communism needed in the introduction (among other things)? If his opinions really need to be mentioned in the article why not just make a whole new section for those instead of putting all of them in the introduction.--HJV 23:39, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: Wow, that is pretty quick. Well, let just see how the vote goes and see what happens. If this article becomes a Featured Candidate, there will be a lot of people who deserve great praise for building it up and making it what it is right now. Zscout370 (talk) 01:35, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured Article Candidate 

message: What does that mean? It seems a little unclear. --Contrib 16:25, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes number 1 

message: Not exactly worth getting into an edit war about, but "impono" does not mean "take", it means (or rather has as one of its many meaning: #14 in the Oxford Latin Dictionary, if you're really interested) "bestow"/"confer". So if we're after a "proper" (=literal?) translation, "has given himself" is better than "has taken to himself". (See ) 81.129.113.82 20:22, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I confirm meaning of "imponere" (impono, imposui, impositum est) as "impose", "bestow", it is etymological root from "impose". The literal translation of "qui sibi nomen imposuit Bendictum XVI" would be "who has bestowed the name Benedict XVI upon himelf". --Alksentros 22:02, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latin translation 

message: Can someone either put a more balanced view to the Uganda reference, or remove it entirely. As a student of mathematics and statistics it seems to me that the conclusions of the article and study cited were faulty. My thoughts were confirmed upon finding a letter in the Washington Post which disputes the claims of the study, saying that it was done in an area that was not representative of the population. Here is the letter: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A15549-2005Mar7?language=printer. 
Further, the position on condoms against AIDS, I believe, is not solely the position of the Pope, but of the Church and as such should be included in a section on the Catholic Church. Further much of this entire section seems to be completely anti-Benedict, anti Catholic Church, with something as prestigious wikipedia, can we at least have something more balanced. Every single view relayed in the section seems to make the Pope's position look arbitrary. If people were to do some reading they would realize that it is not.
:Dear ?,
:Which of the studies are you talking about? There was one giving evidence for what the referenced article called the social vaccine, and another study denying this, referenced in the WaPo. The latter had a very limited scope, according the WaPo. If you're talking about the latter study, I think I reworded it accordingly.
:As for the Pope-Church thing - You're right it's the Church's view and not merely his own, but he also subscribes to it (as any Catholic should) I am planning to set up different categories in the theology page:
:1)His personal theology: views, emphases and fields of his own scholarship (as a theologian) - though I must admit that I'm lacking knowledge there.
:2)Views and pronouncements as head of the CDF, hence representing the Church - the "controversial stuff" should go in there too.
:If anyone has the energy and knowledge to do the editing, please do so.
:Str1977 17:50, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: To keep the discussions organized, I would like to suggest that all the possible highly controversial issues regarding the Theology of Pope Benedict XVI page take place on the Talk:Theology of Pope Benedict XVI page. (This time, I resisted the urge to move the posts above to the other page.) Conf 20:51, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  AIDS Section in Theology 

message: Has been revived (following its censorship by Str1977) upon the Theology page, and the theological law is stated. Flamekeeper 06:38, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Involvement in the Civil Order & The Question of the Law

message: "Pope Benedict said of his election that he prayed to God to not be chosen. "Evidently," said the Pope, "He didn't listen to me this time." Written by user imposter User:ClockworkSouI and User:Temporary. Can anyone verify this with sources? --Silversmith 15:40, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've read this mentioned on CNN.com and I believe I've heard it on CNN as well. --Golbez 15:54, May 6, 2005 (UTC)
*:Ok, it's legit. But it needs to be added in an appropriate location, and altered slightly.--Silversmith 16:29, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

text: I've heard him saying it in german TV, this translation into english is also correct. Soky 14:00, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ClockworkSouI and Temporary 

message: Ok, I got this email from the Vatican about photos of B16. This is what I got: I can send you the official photo of pope Benedict XVI. The price of the picture is euro 4,00 , the authorization to use the photo  in your website is euro 50,00.sincerely MAURIZIA. So, for right now, we are stuck. What can we do? Zscout370 (talk) 17:11, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem 

message: Who deleted the audio file with the German pronunciation of the original name of Benedict XVI? It was a very useful feature. Hardouin 01:52, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No idea, but I can see if anyone can add it back in. Zscout370 (talk) 02:00, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Audio file 

message: This is the (current, vote is still ongoing) results from the Manual of Styles survey:
"Without creating all the matrices out by hand for the purposes of getting a quick count, we can use a handy online calculator (http://www.ericgorr.net/condorcet/) to tally these results by selecting Beatpath Winner and pasting these values into the form as the list of ranked ballots.
Currently, with 50 votes counted, Alternative 3 is the Condorcet majority winner, preferred 28:22 (or 56%) to Alternative 1, and defeating all other alternatives by a larger margin. This means that 28 ballots preferred Alternative 3 to Alternative 1, and 22 ballots preferred Alternative 1 to Alternative 3, as you may see if you count the sorted list of ballots above.
No option currently is preferred by a supermajority of more than 3:1 against the default (none of the above, or Alternative 5), so no current consensus can be determined to exist."
This was updated by User:Whig on 06:26, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What if we just do a runoff vote between Alternative 1 and Alternative 3? Although it probably still won't result in consensus... =( --User:Jenmoa 15:16, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That could be an idea, and I will do the up or down vote on this, since the method Whig used confused many people. Or, if that does not work, I should let every page decide. Zscout370 (talk) 15:19, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Styles Survey Update