Talk:Pope Benedict XVI

From Wikiquote
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Table of Contents out of place

Can't seem to figure out how to fix the table of contents box. It's way down in the middle of the article right now. Sveden 17:10, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Potter

The Pope's quote about Harry Potter was actually written by a subordinate and Benedict has said he sees nothing wrong with the books. It should probably be deleted.

Actually it should probably be moved to the attributed section and we should explain that he didnt see it. Wikiquote is also for common misattributions. Savidan 10:06, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The whole article is weird at its best. The first section is also the smallest, and the first after that one is the head of the Catholic Church talking about other religious systems. Aside from "World Youth Day", the biggest section is the one about homosexuality. What's more, those quotes that are on top are not just debatable (see above), but presented in such a way (as short as possible) as if their authors try their best to eliminate the context. Being someone who has seen his writings and how beautiful they can be, I am suspicious of intentions of the contributors, and hereby criticize the article's structure and quality of the content (the way quotes are presented). I do so urging people to objectivity and prioritizing when editing this article. --Paxcoder 18:51, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quote slightly revised?!?!

What does that mean? Let's try to get the real version. Savidan 10:05, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Thus, a vision of the whole gradually grew for me that was nourintered along my theological path. I rejoiced to be able to say something of my own, something new and yet completely within the faith of the Church. The feeling of aquiring a theological vision that was ever more clearly my own was the most wonderful experience of those years."
    • Milestones, p. 150 (On his theological formation in seminary - quote slightly revised)

somebody got a quote wrong

"I think we must reflect more on what democracy in the exercise of authority would mean. Is truth determined by a majority vote, only for a new 'truth' to be 'discovered' by a new majority tomorrow?" Ratzinger

"The Public Square" by Richard John Neuhaus, First Things 1996

http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9604/public.html#obeying

"Truth is not determined by majority vote." Doug Gwyn, comp.org.usenix, Jul 3, 1991

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.org.usenix/msg/3ebe79de0723ff24?hl=en

Links to the originals are listed.

Cleanup tag

This page needs the following cleanup: remove the quote marks and eliminate the sorting by topic. ~ UDScott 17:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, this page leaves me with a very bad taste...it could use a complete recall. I find it very disrespectful and slanted...very disappointing.
—This unsigned comment is by 50.37.85.236 (talkcontribs) .
Respectfully or disrespectfully slanted criticism and additions are usually accepted, if not always welcomed, but disrespectful censorship usually is not. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 10:58, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced

  • I too hope in this short reign to be a man of peace.
    • Explaining to the cardinals his choice of name after Pope Benedict XV who worked against World War I.
  • We do not seek a Christ whom we have invented, for only in the real communion of the Church do we encounter the real Christ.
    • unidentified source

Rollback and protection

This page needs to be rollbacked and protected due to vandalism. – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 14:23, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Ottawahitech (talk) 14:51, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ottawahitech, Ilovemydoodle already said: due to vandalism. In this case, it's from a WMF-banned editor. Ilovemydoodle, I think he will have stopped now, but I'll be watching if he continues or not. --Ferien (talk) 15:44, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien, Which is the wmf-banned vandal? I see several comments have been removed, including one that looks like it is from User:UDScott which has not been restored? I'm talking about this page is that the one others here are talking about? (see edit summary: rv banned user) Ottawahitech (talk) 14:26, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ottawahitech, on this page, all the IPs that have edited (at least for the last 50 revisions) are this WMF-banned vandal. They IP-hop to evade blocks. Ferien (talk) 15:18, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien, there have only been 21 revisions to this page? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:30, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think he means the main page for the Pope - not the talk page. In any case, I have again protected the page. ~ UDScott (talk) 15:31, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On the page, Pope Benedict XVI, there are around 410 revisions. If we are talking about this page here, we're probably going to be talking about the article, not the talk page. --Ferien (talk) 15:41, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien, With all due respect, You have banned 154.179.196.208 saying only "(WMF ban evasion)". You did not tell the community how you arrived at your conclusion that this user is wmf-banned. Yes you have recently been given the crown of a WQ admin, but please do not forget that this does not give you dictator rights. Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 15:47, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ottawahitech, there is no rule saying that I must say how exactly I realised that editor was evading their WMF ban in the block resaon - please link to a block where this has happened, because I for one have never seen this happen on any Wikimedia wiki. If you had asked about it, I could have told you how I got to that conclusion, although I would prefer to explain off-wiki due to w:WP:DENY and a possible change of behaviour if I explain to you what tells me it's them. I wouldn't say this makes me a dictator (and also disagree with your description of admin as a crown) --Ferien (talk) 16:12, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Why is this page vandalized so often, especially by GRP? – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 17:34, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]