Talk:Pope

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former featured article candidate Pope is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
February 3, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted
June 3, 2006 Peer review Reviewed
Current status: Former featured article candidate

Are sedevacantists schismatics?[edit]

"Sedevacantists are considered to be schismatics by the mainstream Roman Catholic Church." Really? Any citations?

The statement was tagged as unsourced for 8 months, so I removed it. If someone can find a reliable source feel free to restore it. Sundayclose (talk) 02:16, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
I've removed several blatantly unreliable sources from the section. Here's a source which indicates that one particular sedevacantist community was schismatic, but I don't think you're going to find any blanket statement that supports the quote in question, because the Church simply doesn't make statements or teachings like that. Elizium23 (talk) 03:07, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

"the Church simply doesn't make statements or teachings like that" unlike all none catholics are going burn in eternal torture forever? unless off course they are married to a catholic. --Thelawlollol (talk) 09:36, 5 July 2016 (UTC)--Thelawlollol (talk) 09:36, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

"According to the Catholic Church"[edit]

"According to the Catholic Church, St Peter", "According to the Catholic Church, the 1st century" in the opening template are redundant and too much. The article would benefit from either a citation replacing "According to the Catholic Church" or removal of the phrase altogether. Mr. Spink talkcontribs 21:24, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Disagree. There is no citation that could replace "According to the Catholic Church" because there is no reliable source that verifies that the claims are absolute fact and not just the opinion of the CC. If you think there is, please cite it here. Leaving the phrase out would be immediately reverted for the same reason. Look at the history of this article and Catholic Church. The phrase has been repeatedly removed and restored. It is important to make a distinction between what the CC claims about the papacy and what is verifiable fact. I'm afraid we must live with the minor inconvenience of redundancy to ensure WP:NPOV. Sundayclose (talk) 22:52, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Royalty and Nobility taskforce[edit]

Should Popes be included under the WikiProject for Royalty and Nobility, seeing as their monarchs of the Vatican? Just wondering. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 14:08, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Adoption of the title of Pope[edit]

For anyone interested, I would like to draw their attention to this discussion about a general issue in the context of pope articles. Feel free to comment there if you like.--Hubon (talk) 15:55, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Pope. 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.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:34, 4 June 2017 (UTC)