Jump to content

Talk:Quinisext Council: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
NPOV: Bede
NPOV: This is an NPOV train wreck.
Line 16: Line 16:


:::::Might it be under a different title/name? The CE is a very reliable source, so I'd be shocked if it was made up out of whole cloth. [[User:Gabrielthursday|Gabrielthursday]] ([[User talk:Gabrielthursday|talk]]) 17:16, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
:::::Might it be under a different title/name? The CE is a very reliable source, so I'd be shocked if it was made up out of whole cloth. [[User:Gabrielthursday|Gabrielthursday]] ([[User talk:Gabrielthursday|talk]]) 17:16, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

*Clearly this article presents the Western - Roman Catholic perspective, relying overwhelmingly on Catholic sources while giving little more than a passing reference to the Orthodox position. I have attached a POV tag which should not be removed until there is consensus on this page that the article's glaring bias has been corrected. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem|talk]]) 05:34, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:34, 17 October 2016

NPOV

This article was lifted almost word-for-word from the Catholic Encyclopedia (1908) and shows a strong anti-Orthodox bias. It needs to be re-edited to make it more NPOV. MishaPan 20:04, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree: the article is utterly unacceptable.81.211.44.171 (talk) 20:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it still needs work. One problem: the status of Pope Hadrian's reference to the Canons of this council- a positive reference in a letter is not necessarily "accepting and confirming" them. Gabrielthursday (talk) 05:50, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I rewrote several chunks of the article, and added some information from a more neutral third party source. Not sure about the objection regarding the source on Hadrian- it seems to have been moderated in the text. I've pulled the NPOV tag for now as in my opinion it seems fairly balanced- add it back if someone disagrees. --Clay Collier (talk) 12:28, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It might be a good idea to remove references (lifted from Catholic Encyclopedia) to Bede's work De sexta mundi aetate, since no such work exists - it may be referencing one of his many letters, but I cannot locate it anywhere in Migne's PL. 136.242.180.165 (talk) 16:30, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Might it be under a different title/name? The CE is a very reliable source, so I'd be shocked if it was made up out of whole cloth. Gabrielthursday (talk) 17:16, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clearly this article presents the Western - Roman Catholic perspective, relying overwhelmingly on Catholic sources while giving little more than a passing reference to the Orthodox position. I have attached a POV tag which should not be removed until there is consensus on this page that the article's glaring bias has been corrected. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:34, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]