Talk:Bonfire of the vanities

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on February 7, 2016, February 7, 2017, February 7, 2019, February 7, 2020, February 7, 2021, and February 7, 2024.

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disambiguation

I notice that this page (on the historical event) is distinguished from that on the book (and film) only by the "The". This seems to me a rather arbitrary distinction since while the "The" may be part of the official title, people will still search without it; and, conversely, the event is the only one of its kind and therefore quite likely to be referred to as "The ...". I'm not sure what disambiguation approach would be best in this case, but some thought is probably needed. - IMSoP 11:21, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

No proof for Botticelli statement

This article records that Sandro Botticelli threw his paintings into the Bonfire of the Vanities. Although this is a popular belief, there is no evidence to support this claim. Even Giorgio Vasari, convinced of Botticelli’s devotion to Savonarola, does not include Botticelli among the artists who contributed their artworks to the fire in his Lives of the Artists. According to John Wyndham, Botticelli could still be counted among the enemies of Savonarola (Wyndham, 4) at the time the two Bonfires were held in 1497. Herbert Horne recorded that as of 1499, Botticelli recieved a commission from Guidantonio Vespucci, who was also recognized as an outspoken enemy of Savonarola (Horne, 282). If Botticelli was a follower of Savonarola, it is unlikely that he would accept commissions from a known enemy. This evidence seems to disprove the theory that Botticelli willingly submitted his paintings to a public burning in 1497. If nothing else, the evidence is inconclusive and one cannot know for certain that Botticelli participated in this event. -TLD

See for more information: Horne, Herbert P. Alessandro Filipepi Commonly Called Sandro Botticelli, Painter of Florence, 1908, 2nd ed. London: George Bell and Sons, 1986. Steinberg, Ronald M. Fra Girolamo Savonarola, Florentine Art, and Renaissance Historiography. Athens: Ohio University, 1977. Wyndham, John. Sandro Botticelli: The Nativity, in the National Gallery, London. London: Percy, Lund, Humphries and Co., [n.d.]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.229.105.10 (talk) 02:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I’ll remove the reference to Botticelli and mark the whole article as wanting sources. If you can improve the article, please go ahead! Cheers, Ian Spackman (talk) 00:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I revised the discussion, adding Botticelli back in, and noting that the historical record on whether he'd burned paintings was unclear. It might be worth noting that some people think that Vasari confused Botticelli with his brother as a follower of Savonarola, but that's properly more a matter for the Botticelli page, since it's rather tangential here. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 15:20, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Original research allegation

Ray Bradbury's 1953 novel Fahrenheit 451 is a science fiction rendering of a bonfire of the vanities. I'm not sure how this can be called out as possible original research. The entry for 451 cites book burning, and the first praragraph for that entry includes the text "The burning of books represents an element of censorship and usually proceeds from a cultural, religious, or political opposition to the materials in question." I suggest the original research tag is removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pgb62uk (talk • contribs) 13:39, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't. Removed. 50.111.46.80 (talk) 04:22, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Bonfire of the vanities. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:59, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

reaction of gov't authorities

Do any of the scholarly sources list any action by the authorities to either stop or encourage this escapade? That would make for important information in the article. 50.111.46.80 (talk) 04:24, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]