This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
1241 papal election article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1241 papal election was a Philosophy and religion good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
July 7, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
papal election in 1241 is often cited as the first
papal conclave due to the confinement of the cardinal electors to the
Septizodium (pictured)? |
I put this article on hold for the following reasons:
Renata ( talk) 22:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I believe I have satisfied your first three comments (I have re-read the article and run a spell check, but grammar is not my forte so please let me know if you caught anything else specific). As for the accounts section, this discusses the only primary source of note that I was able to discover and his impact on secondary sources. To wit, there are no other notable accounts of the election, and no sources available for expansion. Thus, I find your recommendation to be counterproductive, unless you happen to know of any sources I have overlooked. The sectioning of notes about the primary sources is important for parallelism with other election and conclave articles, among other things. Removal clearly would not improve the article. Savidan 23:55, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I deleted the references to this source, on the grounds that it is partisan and sectarian, as well as misleading. Vicedomino ( talk) 21:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
"It is likely that the cause of death was dysentery, ..." I have added to the footnote a warning that this is pure speculation−with no support in contemporary accounts. It also contradicts the paragraph immediately above, which states that the pope-elect was old and ill already−which is vouched for in the contemporary accounts. Moreover, Henderson's expertise, Germany in the Middle Ages, is tangential to papal elections, and has little weight, if any, as an authority. Vicedomino ( talk) 21:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
This book is a religious tract, from the point-of-view of English Protestantism. The quotation at n. 16, ...a "feeble, ignorant, old fanatic" who was "destitute of any other qualification"... is the author's own polemical thrust, unsupported by evidence. I propose to delete it. Vicedomino ( talk) 06:00, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
1241 papal election article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1241 papal election was a Philosophy and religion good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
July 7, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
papal election in 1241 is often cited as the first
papal conclave due to the confinement of the cardinal electors to the
Septizodium (pictured)? |
I put this article on hold for the following reasons:
Renata ( talk) 22:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I believe I have satisfied your first three comments (I have re-read the article and run a spell check, but grammar is not my forte so please let me know if you caught anything else specific). As for the accounts section, this discusses the only primary source of note that I was able to discover and his impact on secondary sources. To wit, there are no other notable accounts of the election, and no sources available for expansion. Thus, I find your recommendation to be counterproductive, unless you happen to know of any sources I have overlooked. The sectioning of notes about the primary sources is important for parallelism with other election and conclave articles, among other things. Removal clearly would not improve the article. Savidan 23:55, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I deleted the references to this source, on the grounds that it is partisan and sectarian, as well as misleading. Vicedomino ( talk) 21:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
"It is likely that the cause of death was dysentery, ..." I have added to the footnote a warning that this is pure speculation−with no support in contemporary accounts. It also contradicts the paragraph immediately above, which states that the pope-elect was old and ill already−which is vouched for in the contemporary accounts. Moreover, Henderson's expertise, Germany in the Middle Ages, is tangential to papal elections, and has little weight, if any, as an authority. Vicedomino ( talk) 21:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
This book is a religious tract, from the point-of-view of English Protestantism. The quotation at n. 16, ...a "feeble, ignorant, old fanatic" who was "destitute of any other qualification"... is the author's own polemical thrust, unsupported by evidence. I propose to delete it. Vicedomino ( talk) 06:00, 25 November 2015 (UTC)