A fact from Psalm 24 appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 23 December 2018 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
For a footnote in the "Catholic" section. Alephb ( talk) 15:20, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Apart from the fact that I was rather surprised to see that my edit which changed Vulgate to the Vulgate (with definite article) was reverted ( [1]), I am more concerned with an inaccuracy in the lead. Specifically, we currently have "In the Greek Septuagint version of the bible, and in its Latin translation Vulgate, this psalm is Psalm 23 in a slightly different numbering system." Although Jerome first used the Greek Hexapla Septuagint as the textual basis for his translation of the Psalms, the Vulgate is not a simple translation of LXX as Jerome translated all the other books of the Hebrew Bible from the Hebrew (apart from the small sections in Aramaic). Jerome's later Hebrew Psalter used pre-Masoretic Hebrew manuscripts for the Psalms as the textual basis. I would suggest a change to "In both the Greek Septuagint version of the bible and the Latin Vulgate, this psalm is Psalm 23 in a slightly different numbering system." Greenshed ( talk) 18:28, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
I think this shows too little that the Vulgate is also a bible version, and we have to write for readers who don't know, not forcing them to open the link. Wording? Suggestion:
A fact from Psalm 24 appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 23 December 2018 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
For a footnote in the "Catholic" section. Alephb ( talk) 15:20, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Apart from the fact that I was rather surprised to see that my edit which changed Vulgate to the Vulgate (with definite article) was reverted ( [1]), I am more concerned with an inaccuracy in the lead. Specifically, we currently have "In the Greek Septuagint version of the bible, and in its Latin translation Vulgate, this psalm is Psalm 23 in a slightly different numbering system." Although Jerome first used the Greek Hexapla Septuagint as the textual basis for his translation of the Psalms, the Vulgate is not a simple translation of LXX as Jerome translated all the other books of the Hebrew Bible from the Hebrew (apart from the small sections in Aramaic). Jerome's later Hebrew Psalter used pre-Masoretic Hebrew manuscripts for the Psalms as the textual basis. I would suggest a change to "In both the Greek Septuagint version of the bible and the Latin Vulgate, this psalm is Psalm 23 in a slightly different numbering system." Greenshed ( talk) 18:28, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
I think this shows too little that the Vulgate is also a bible version, and we have to write for readers who don't know, not forcing them to open the link. Wording? Suggestion: