Talk:Fulton J. Sheen

message: Sheen was once defeated in a biblical knowledge competition by Gen. George S. Patton Jr. according to recent Patton biography, if memory serves.
: That's interesting - but do you have an actual source?
Yoda921 05:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patton 

message: "Sheen adopted his stage name in honor of Catholic archbishop and theologian Fulton J. Sheen. Sheen lived on Brown Street in the South Park neighborhood, and was one of 10 siblings (9 boys and one girl). He attended Chaminade High School (now Chaminade-Julienne High School). He was raised as a Roman Catholic." <-- from the Martin Sheen article on Wikipedia. Shouldn't this info also be on the Fulton Sheen page, as trivia or something more significant?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.214.24.27 (talk) 23:12, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Martin Sheen name source 

message: Any ideas which St. Patrick's he was asked to pastor?  There are something like twenty in the Peoria diocese. /blahedo (t) 04:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  St. Patrick's parish 

message: How many books did he write--90 or 73? Dynzmoar (talk) 00:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that would depend on how to define books. Some short works can be classified as books or pamphlets. I also doubt there is any publication than has counted his published books. Pending a new citable source becoming available, I'm going to edit the article to say more than 70 books. Dgf32 (talk) 02:06, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: On second though, the 73 number appears multiple places in the article. I'm going to change the one 90 to 73. If anyone can find a source with an exact count, please update the article. Dgf32 (talk) 02:14, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction! 

message: The article says "His youthful appearance was still evident on one occasion when a local priest who was unable to celebrate Mass asked Sheen to substitute for him."  Why does this show he looked young?  --Shanedidona (talk) 00:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Youth

message: The foundation that has been mentioned is not notable. One of the people associated with it is also WP:NN. This info does not seem important to this article. Other people have sainthood causes, the mechanics of which are unknown and similarly uninteresting. I don't see that this makes a difference. Nor, apparently, do other editors, which is why the foundation is nn. Student7 (talk) 20:13, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Why must a nn foundation be noted? It isn't for any other would-be saint? It isn't for Mother Teresa nor for Pope John Paul II. Why Fulton Sheen? Student7 (talk) 21:33, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

text: Neither Ladd or the foundation itself need mention.  O'Conner is of course notable but it is not clear from the text if his involvement rises to the level of being mentioned on this page.  Boldness is our friend...   Baccyak4H (Yak!) 02:04, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

text: The Foudation is not notable enough to warrant its own article, however it certainly is relevant to the legacy of this notable figure and therefore it is right that it be put into the article. It has to be or else an important fact is omitted from the account of Fulton J. Sheen. Gavin (talk) 19:14, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record, no one has made the suggestion that the foundation would merit its own article. patsw (talk) 19:56, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We now have another plug for the foundation. Someone who appears to be connected with it appears to be inserting these edits and vigorously defending them against all comers. You won't see WP:SPAM like this in others religious figures bios. Student7 (talk) 14:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Foundation

message: On top of the infobox:
"The Most Reverend
Venerable "
why not "his greatness, holy, luminescent and beloved" as well?
Wikipedia, where has your neutrality gone?
--MathsPoetry (talk) 14:33, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this is very off-putting, and is possibly done for that reason. Student7 (talk) 19:22, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Those titles could be used if they were his official titles in some circles. The ones given are his formal titles as used in the Catholic Church, which in his case would be the relevant authority. You can find explanations for them through the links given. Per the MOS, the infobox can include information such as this. Daniel the Monk (talk) 15:56, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: According to the article, Spellman got even with Sheen by canceling the latter's Good Friday sermons at St. Patrick's Cathedral.  Spellman was Archbishop of Boston.  St. Patrick's is in New York City.  How did Spellman acquire authority over the sermon schedule at some other Archbishop's cathedral?John Paul Parks (talk) 02:19, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Wasn't Spellman "Archbishop of New York from 1939 to 1967, having previously served as an auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Boston (1932–39)"? (quoted from the lead of the article on Francis Spellman). -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:57, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, Spellman was Archbishop of New York.  My previous post was in error.  Yet, the story seems suspicious.  If Spellman was Archbishop of New York and Sheen was an Auxiliary Bishop of New York, why would the intervention of the Pope be needed to resolve a dispute about the disposition of packets of dried milk?  The phrase "itchy fingers of his own cardinal" raises concern as well.  A cardinal is part of a group that advises the pope on church matters, and who does not, merely because he is a cardinal, have any supervisory authority over anyone else.  If Spellman had supervisory authority over Sheen, it would be in his role as Archbishop of New York, and not as cardinal.John Paul Parks (talk) 14:27, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The whole section "Fallout with Cardinal Spellman" is a verbatim lift of Arroyo's foreword (pp. xi–xvi) to Sheen's Treasure in Clay. So it's well sourced, although based on a single source which might be considered biased. The verbatim quotations also raise WP:COPYVIO concerns, and I agree that the paragraph has a whiff of WP:UNDUE about it, unless more independent & reliable sources can be found on the subject. Rephrasing and culling that section is called for. My interest in this article is very marginal (I just wanted to mention the Bleecker Street Sheen Center here), so I'm not going to work any further on this. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 20:33, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Fallout with Cardinal Spellman

message: In the Infobox, shouldn't his previous episcopacy immediately follow his ultimate one, rather than being relegated to an oddball spot way down the page? That after all was the position he held when he became famous, and when he became famous as a bishop. I mean, I'm a Baptist from Seattle, but I had heard of "Bishop Sheen" prior to 1966. --Haruo (talk) 14:28, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Belated thanks. Done. —173.68.139.31 (talk) 18:01, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Previous bishop post out of order? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Fulton J. Sheen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714133337/http://www.cdop.org/pages/NNewsDetail.aspx?ID=21 to http://www.cdop.org/pages/NNewsDetail.aspx?ID=21
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714173847/http://www.cdop.org/pages/NNewsDetailAttachment.aspx?ID=20 to http://www.cdop.org/pages/NNewsDetailAttachment.aspx?ID=20
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140909063838/http://cdop.org:80/post/PostFeatured.aspx?ID=3490 to http://cdop.org/post/PostFeatured.aspx?ID=3490
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080911223415/http://www.keepthefaith.org:80/default.aspx to http://www.keepthefaith.org/default.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140909063838/http://cdop.org:80/post/PostFeatured.aspx?ID=3490 to http://cdop.org/post/PostFeatured.aspx?ID=3490
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:36, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Fulton J. Sheen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.archbishopsheencause.org/links.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120531065025/http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/12/13/140228.shtml to http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/12/13/140228.shtml
*Added  tag to http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1203795.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140904055246/http://www.centralillinoisproud.com/story/d/story/canonization-of-archbishop-fulton-sheen-suspended/39658/BOdQEjHnF0mqJRmKJhAeJA to http://www.centralillinoisproud.com/story/d/story/canonization-of-archbishop-fulton-sheen-suspended/39658/BOdQEjHnF0mqJRmKJhAeJA
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:04, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This morning a miracle was approved and attributed to Fulton Sheen. This is a necessary step on the way to his beatification.--Dcheney (talk) 09:12, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miracle approved 

message: Content added by  has been removed from this article for copyright reasons. In spite of warning, the individual using this IP has persisted in copying content from copyrighted sources without compatible licensing to Wikipedia. Please do not restore any removed text without first ensuring that the text does not duplicate, closely paraphrase or plagiarize from a previously published source, whether the one cited or another (issues have been detected from other sources than those named). Based on the editing pattern of this person, we cannot make the assumption that the content is usable. You are welcome to use sourced facts that may have been removed to create new content in your own words or to incorporate brief quotations of copyrighted material in accordance with the non-free content policy and guideline. See Wikipedia:Copy-paste and Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/67.184.212.160. Thank you. -- 💵Money💵emoji💵💸 20:43, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright cleanup

message: I have reduced some of the wording in the infobox. These fields get about 3 inches on my full-screened browser, and the infobox is designed for conveying "at-a-glance" current information, so it helps to get quickly to the point in a few words. Elizium23 (talk) 20:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concise infobox 

message: Please be aware that the honorific prefixes in the infobox and used throughout this page are the official honorific titles used by the Catholic Church. Regardless of your opinions of the subject, these are the titles that were bestowed to him by the organization that he represents. This is not biased language, and should not be removed.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by MisterAziz (talk • contribs) 17:18, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catholic Honorifics 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:08, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion