Talk:Pope Peter II

message: This article is full of loaded language:  "fictitious," "pretenders," "nope," "miniscule," etc.  It sure smells of a POV... David aukerman talk 20:03, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. It's clearly a very pro-Roman Catholic Church article. Coconuteire 09:41, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Removed POV language. --Lode Runner 05:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

text: It should also be noted that the term pretender, when used to refer to a self-proclaimed monarch or Pope, does not imply that the claim is invalid.  --Lode Runner 05:30, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: POV check

message: Aside from the obvious trolling of zealots (which you find on every religion-related article, and is practically impossible to fight effectively), there is another problem: we should have a criterion (e.g., "elected by at least one actual cardinal" or "must meet the Wikipedia criteria for a biography page") for inclusion in the list of antipopes, or it will soon become as long as the beard of the prophet: nothing keeps me or you from having our drinking buddies bestow the status on us at the local pub, and it actually sounds like a lot of fun. I have already removed one absurd candidate ("Luciferian initiation"? I mean, seriously...), but they could just sprout up in thousands. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Complainer (talk • contribs) 09:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually there are only a few individuals claiming to be the Pope... --Againme (talk) 20:38, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criteria for inclusion

message: Why does the last Pope Peter have to be the second?  Couldn't there be multiple Pope Peters, just the last one is also the last pope at the apocalypse? - MonkStar (talk) 01:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it could be. See Prophecy of the Popes. --Againme (talk) 20:33, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peter III, IV, etc. 

message: The term "Angelic Pope" is mentioned in the "See also" section but the link merely redirects to this page where the term is not otherwise explained or mentioned. How is it similar and how does it differ from the term "Pope Peter II"? — Hippietrail (talk) 07:55, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Angelic Pope 

message: The article reads: "Out of respect for the Apostle Saint Peter, the first pope, no pope has ever adopted the name Peter II. It is considered unlikely that any future pope would choose the name. Many popes have, however, had the saint's name as their baptismal name, most recently Pope Francis (Jorge Mario Bergoglio)".
But Pope Francis, as shown in the very same paragraph, does not have the name Peter as baptismal name. His name is Jorge Mario. Neither Jorge nor Mario are Spanish language variants of the name Peter (which in Spanish is Pedro), just in case there has been a misunderstanding with assuming either Jorge or Mario where variants of Peter.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.231.229.180 (talk) 21:09, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baptismal Name of Pope Francis? 

message: What on earth is the summary at the start?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.93.73.242 (talk) 16:31, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  [Untitled] 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Angelic Pope and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 13#Angelic Pope until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Veverve (talk) 10:39, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Angelic Pope" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]