User talk:Sonty567

Thank you: Seguir el pulso

Dear Sir Dmitri Nikolaj and Estimable mr. Sonty567: I herewith like to really thank you for your helpfull support in the case of my recent astonishing blocking up from further editing again. In the mean time with best regards I remain faithfully yours: D.A. Borgdorff - e.i. - MASc. by 86.83.155.44 (talk) 11:32, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Dear mr. Borgdorff, Wikipedia is to me a knowledge provider to which I can sometimes add a few things. Since not all good knowledge can be written down or pictured out, a few excentric touches of own wisdom can be helpfull. Unfortunatly some of Wikipedia's users only work with centric minds... Anyway, wishing you all the best. --Sonty567 (talk) 18:55, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I am thinking probably being supposed to must have so to be stopped definitely in this continuously handling of matters regarding my person. Unfortunately: in the moment can't see it differently. Esteemed regards with thanks again. As usual: D.A. Borgdorff - from 86.83.155.44 (talk) 04:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Maybe a foreign Wikipedia like this English one will do you some good. Some problems with how users (re)act on our home-wikipedia might be related to "our/ their" cultural behaviour. I can't answer these coming days cz I'm about to go on a 10day journey. Take care & don't take it too personal. Yours sincerely, --Sonty567 (talk) 01:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Saints

All saints are canonized after their death, not before. It is silly and unidiomatic to say "Willibrord was declared a saint after his death", however desperate you are to secularize these articles. Johnbod (talk) 02:53, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure it's only after his death he was declared a saint. But why remove the good info on Saint Boniface? Sonty567 (talk) 04:18, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

What good info? - you were the one removing info. The lead should agree with the article title. If you don't like that, propose a move. Johnbod (talk) 00:08, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

The article title is for example not uniform with multiple articles in Category:West Saxon saints. I've no clue why there is "Saint" in the article title. Apparently there is no need to put it in the title and/or starting the text in the article with it. Anyway there are more Bonifaces. Regards Sonty567 (talk) 02:30, 29 March 2011 (UTC) Ps. your other info-deletion can be seen here

It is no doubt just because there are so many other Bonifaces that "Saint" is in the title. Johnbod (talk) 03:47, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I have again deleted a bit of that info you refer to: the group including soldiers and guards, that's in a paragraph cited with reference to Talbot, who mentions priests and deacons, not armed guards. If you wish to have those guards in there, you should add a reference--Schieffer might say something about it, or maybe von Padberg. Drmies (talk) 02:49, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes you are right, i made a bad mistake in that 1, sorry for that and thank you for correcting. Talbot made in 1954 a bit of a weird text with his small retinue. The vitae do mention some stuff. E.g. Willibalds version[1] speaks at the end of his vita of Boniface destroying pagan worship in Frisia, overthrowing pagan temples and gods. Also Willibald writes that in the last mission Boniface took with him a picked number of his personal followers. The second vita mentions a number of 52. Multiple modern writers (e.g. (in Dutch) [2][3][4]) nowadays have some serious doubts about the mission and point out that the mission was likely/possible with military aid for the Boniface side and not a plain looting from the Frisian side. Sonty567 (talk) 03:30, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

<--No apology necessary. The whole thing needs better sourcing anyway--I just haven't had the time or the gumption to make a proper distinction between the vita and modern biography. Von Padberg reports in his latest biography on this issue of robbery versus martyrdom; that will remain a hot-bed issue for a while to come. It is of course clear that Willibald would not have mentioned an armed guard--he won't go farther than "attendants", just before the saint gets it, I believe. The article by Wagenaar you linked to is quite interesting (thank you for that!), but the salient point (for your edit), "Het is bekend dat Bonifatius zich tot aan zijn dood toe liet vergezellen," that's just way too vague and calls for verification. I am sure--I haven't looked for it specifically--that some German sources would support the military might; it's clear that this was the case at Geismar, a Frankish stronghold, but Wikipedia can't extrapolate like Wagenaar can. Hans Mol's argument, I agree with to a great extent, but unfortunately it's not a very well sourced article and its source is a well-intentioned hobby club more than a peer-reviewed academic publication.

Are you familiar with Johannes P. Kern (1989), "Zum Tode des Heiligen Bonifatius" (Theologie und Glaube 79: 301-21)? An interesting supposition, which no one (including me) accepts. The Frisian 2004 opera, which you may know, proposes another interesting theory, also completely imaginary and rather unlikely, but certainly meaningful in what it suggests about current Dutch attitudes toward the saint--the opera is a kind of extension of Auke Jelsma's general opinion about him. Anyway, we'll get this article into shape, though it may take some time. A while ago, I introduced (or tried to) a system of uniform references, but didn't finish. Don't let that stop you, and if you don't like the format, use a different one, as long as it's clear, and at some point we'll straighten it all out. All the best, Drmies (talk) 05:16, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Dear Drmies. I'm not familiar with a lot of modern literature about Boniface, and I'm too lazy to go to academic libraries to get them...
nl:Joris van Eijnatten and nl:Fred van Lieburg (2nd print, 2006), Nederlandse religiegeschiedenis, p. 52. Kaj van Vliet (2002), In kringen van Kanunniken. Munsters en kapittels in het bisdom Utrecht 695-1227, p. 78. Ian Wood (2001), The missionary life. Saints and the evangelisation of Europe, 400-1050, p. 60. mention in small or a tiny bit larger text some doubts. I'm under the impression that some of those recent doubts, writings etc. crystallized because the killing happened around 1250 years ago. Anyway, I wasn't planning for a large rewrite on and source finding for these articles. Regards Sonty567 (talk) 08:31, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sonty--if you're too lazy, you can sit in your comfy chair with your laptop and order De moord op Bonifatius: Het spoor terug by Annelies van der Goot, a VPRO radio program from 2005 available on CD (ISBN 9054448776). Enjoy! Drmies (talk) 17:54, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I know that 1. Quite entertaining and nice piece of work. I listened to it quite a long time ago. I believe prof. Mol is in the audio(?). The maker also goes to the gravesite in Fulda. Well that I found a nice piece! We are stuck with the half fairy-tailed vitae, but here we might find facts. If I'm correct the skeleton in the grave was seen a long time ago. Next time they should carbon date it etc. According to the vitae Boniface and his fellow Willibrord became well over 80 years old... The average man in those days was glad he became 40. Anyway the skeleton in the grave was about 2 metres long. If that skeleton is Boniface, he was a giant towering half a metre over the average man I believe. Grtz Sonty (talk) 21:22, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Lutz von Padberg, Studien zur Bonifatiusverehrung: Zur Geschichte des Codex Ragyndrudis und der Fuldaer Reliquien des Bonifatius, has an interesting section on the study of the relics when they opened the grave in the late 1960s, including a photograph or two. Drmies (talk) 02:53, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Sonty567. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for City bicycle

An article that you have been involved in editing—City bicycle—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. João Pimentel Ferreira 22:56, 10 February 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joao.pimentel.ferreira (talk • contribs)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Sonty567. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Sonty567. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)