Talk:Papal conclave, October 1978

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Article merged: See old talk-page here —Preceding unsigned comment added by VirtualSteve (talkcontribs) 11:51, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Secret votes[edit]

Aren't the votes secret? How do we have them recorded? --Error 01:38, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Are you referring to the board? Those are not the votes, that's the distribution of the cardinals by continent. Other than that, after the conclave cardinals may well reveal who it was that they voted in. But that is done individually, there's no "report on the conclave", no sensus. Regards, Redux 02:45, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I thought the Cardinals pledged on the Gospels that they will not tell anything about what happened in the conclave...Is this a new rule instaured by Jean Paul II ?

Revas 21:14 18/04/05 (UTC)


Would this article be better placed at "Papal conclave, October 1978"? --Oldak Quill 10:37, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The standard wikipedia way of dealing with elections is [location election, year] Where a couple of elections take place in the one year, it is usually written as [location election, year (month)], for example Irish general election, 1982 (February). In this case papal replaces location, because many people in google searches may use papal in searches, while others mightn't immediately recognise what a conclave is, so papal contextualises it. FearÉIREANN 20:12, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)


Am I the only one who finds the terms 'winner' and 'defeated' a bit out of place here? Elde 19:15, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It is an election. Some people canvass for votes, though rarely for themselves. Someone wins. Ipso facto, there is a winner. FearÉIREANN 23:33, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I don't agree, there is no winner, because there is no official candidate. Someone is elected, but he is not a winner because he did not officially campaigned for. Revas 21:16 18/04/05 (UTC)

Oh really? Have you not seen the Ratzinger campaign in the last week? Conservatives know that Ratzinger has no chance of winning, but by hyping him up, they know other conservatives can appear moderate. Both 1978 conclaves saw campaigns around Benelli and Siri. If you think there are no campaigns you don't know how conclaves actually work, my friend. FearÉIREANN 21:46, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

But it was not an official campaign. And you said that Ratzingerhas no chance of winning. And that's certainly true, and he knows it. So he is not "campaigning" in order to be elected. Both camps (conservatives and reformists) were counting there troops last week, but it doesn't make a campaign as we understand it. Revas 22:17 18/04/05 (UTC)