Talk:Therese Neumann

message: Other than a minor, weakly sourced, bit in the Inedia section, this article cites one source, a book that is "the personal memories of a life-time family friend who was also an official witness in the process leading to the Cause for Therese Neumann's beatification".
Throughout, claims are stated as simple facts. I don't know if this can be saved.
Mdbrownmsw 15:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So fix it.  Hell, I'd fix it myself if I knew more about her. What I do know is that she was investigated and found to be a fraud. Everything about her behavior indicates that she was a Munchausen Syndrome drama queen. --Bluejay Young 21:08, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whether she was a fraud or not is not the issue here, with respect.  She is notable because she was famous in her lifetime and beyond, and there's been a great deal written about her, including her alleged fraudulence.  That makes her a suitable subject for any credible encyclopedia.  --  JackofOz 13:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  My previous comment does not refer to the question of Therese Neumann having or not having an encyclopedia entry, but to the uselessness of the current entry (at time of writing) to a reader seeking reasonably full coverage of the topic. Lack of objectivity (by omission or otherwise) destroys any value in the article. What credibility is left to an encyclopedia composed of such pieces?  --kscally 22:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree with Mdbrownmsw's assertion that the article is weakly sourced.  However, we don't have a basis for saying the article lacks NPOV. The factual assertions in the article are supported by the citations, and so unless we find citations to the contrary, we can't really dispute their facutal accuracy just because they're dubious. A more correct tag is: .  I'll add it to the article so we can maybe find some other sources with can further substantiate or repute some of the facts asserted in the article. Dgf32 (talk) 16:52, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems 

message: While I lived in Germany there was a lot of press about this woman. After she died, it was claimed that her body did not decompose, that she had the "odour of sanctity" marking a true saint. If she hadn't had anything to eat and only air and water as sustenance for many years, there wouldn't be anything left to rot ;) .  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.145.92.233 (talk) 22:42, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "the odour of sanctity" 

message: this at bare minimum has grammatical issues, but I don't think I'm equipped to both correct those and parse which phrases are quotations.  i cut the following from immediately after "the periodical of the movement."  hopefully someone can clarify and determine how to present it neutrally:
: It is said that the startling phenomenon of Konnersreuth is approved by God to be an impact that can't be argued away. Science will not be able to make out how the wonder happened and persist. Everyone should look into his heart for understanding and this will create various useful thoughts to understand the signs of the times. Because they consider it ungodly and amiss, some want dictate to God what to do, but God does what he wants and will achieve his goal at last. Blessed is he, who not gets annoyed at God.
::TheNuszAbides (talk) 23:58, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  under miscellaneous, paragraph beginning "Reinhard Lorenz" 

message: There appears to be two critical works written on Neumann written by Catholic writers, Paul Siwek, S.J.: Une Stigmatisee de Nos Jours (Paris: Lethielleux; 1950) and Hilda C. Graef The Case of Therese Neumann (Westminster, Md.: Newman Press; 1951). I do not own these works but will see if I can locate the books. Skeptical information can also be found in Bergen Evans's The Spoor of Spooks: And Other Nonsense (Purnell, 1955, pp. 96-99) HealthyGirl (talk) 19:00, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Skeptical works

message: I can think of better terms to use ...why made the typical user get confused and have to go off page to look something up. Why not just say non-eating or something immediately understandable? Jack.B.2007 (talk) 18:23, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Inedia?