Talk:Dionigi di Borgo San Sepolcro

Biography assessment rating comment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 19:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Francesco Petrarca

Francesco Petrarca has his very own article, discuss him in relation to Dionigi, or it does appear this article needs to be deleted because he can only be discussed as part of someone else. He was either a unique and worthy singular being or not. He was, so let him have his own article and discuss Patrarch's life in Petrarch's article. KP Botany 04:37, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Removed material from bibliography

I removed the bibliography section, because the article doesn't appear to be citing any of these works. I'll put them here, in case they're needed later:

• Letters OF Familiar Matters/Rerum familiarium libri, translatred by A.S. Bernardo, volume. I, Albany, N.Y., 1975, p. 172 - 180.
• The Renaissance Philosophy of One by Ernst Cassirer/P.O. Kristeller/J.H. edge universe Jr., Chicago U.P., 1948 p. 36-46
• Letters from Petrarch, translation by Morris Bishop, Bloomington, Indiana U.P., 1966, p. 45-51
• Took, John. (March 22, 2003) Medium Aevum. Zygmunt Baranski, Chiosar con altro testo: leggere Dante nel Trecento. Volume 72; Issue 1; Page 160.
• Didier, Peron. (May 23, 2003) Libération Voyages Mont Ventoux Pic épique Etape mythique du Tour de France, le mont Ventoux a autant fasciné les écrivains que les grimpeurs. Randonnée méditativesur les traces de Pétrarque. Issue 6850, Section: Guide.
• Comadira, Narcis. (April 1, 2004) Diario El Pais (Spain). Unica: L'ascenció al mont Ventós. Section: Unica; Page 7.
• Velli, Giuseppe. (December 22, 2005) Italica. Petrarch's Epystole ** Volume 82; Issue 3-4, Page 366.
• Cannarsa, Aurelia. (June 22, 2006) Italica. Versum efficit ipsa relatio contrariorum: il modello agostiniano del dissidio in Petrarca. Volume 83; Issue 2; Page 147.
• Winkler, von Willi. (December 30, 2006) Süddeutsche Zeitung Es war einmal: Petrarca und die Entdeckung des Ich. Section: SZ Wochenende; Page 6.

--Akhilleus (talk) 15:27, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Removed paragraph

I took this out:

Dionigi remains one of the most influential and important figures in a time of heightened literary activity that started in the fourteenth century with writers like Dante, Petrarch and Boccaccio. This is known as trecento humanistic studies and is working in the vernacular instead of Latin.

I would be surprised to see that Moschella says that Dionigi is one of the "most influential and important figures" in the trecento. The more glaring problem here is that Dionigi was an influential figure in the 14th century; he is not, however, and influential figure in trecento studies. (In the same way that Pericles was influential in classical Greece, but is not an influential figure in classical studies.) As written, the paragraph is peacockery anyway. --Akhilleus (talk) 15:34, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• All Moschella actually says is that "for the vastness of his writings and in the formation of taste, Dionigi was among the personalities of major importance in nascent Humanism", a much more guarded statement. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:28, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

The passage is adapted from the last sentence of the entry on Dionigi in Medieval Italy: an Encyclopedia, here. Our article exactly quotes "Dionigi remains one of the most influential and important figures in Trecento humanistic studies", but breaks the sentence up with extra material and supplies a deceptive citation to Moschella. At this point, I'm going to have to guess that PMAnderson is the first person who's worked on this article to consult Moschella directly. --Akhilleus (talk) 23:48, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

References

Image

I'd rather not have an image of Augustine's Confessions in this article; why not find a nice manuscript of one of Petrarch's letters to Dionigi, or of something written by Dionigi himself, if anything still exists? --Akhilleus (talk) 15:35, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Turns out none exists - as I already looked for such an image. The next best thing I felt that applied to the article was Augustine's Confessions since it was a very valued gift by Petrarch from Dionigi.--Doug ^talk 15:40, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that the Confessions isn't mentioned in the lead (and shouldn't be), but the image is appearing opposite the lead. If there's nothing better right now, so be it, but I'd rather see an image that is related to the text in the lead--maybe a picture of Sansepolcro if there's one we can use. --Akhilleus (talk) 16:35, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for showing interest in the article. I moved the image to the "Early life" section, which I will have to agree with you might be a better place for it than the lead. Should you find a more appropriate image, feel free to drop it in and delete this one if you think that improves the article even further.--Doug ^talk 17:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I'll see if I can find anything. Perhaps I will have to arrange a trip to Sansepolcro. --Akhilleus (talk) 17:11, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Removed references

This reference: The European Renaissance: Centres and Peripheries By Peter Burke, page 25 didn't support the clause it was attached to, which says "Petrarch carried this personal copy with him for the rest of his life..." So the reference is here instead, perhaps it will be useful in the future. --Akhilleus (talk) 22:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again for showing interest in the article - do appreciate it. Excellent edits you have made lately. This will come out as a very nice article now that everyone is participating.--Doug ^talk 22:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

The most welcome thanks would be to write articles that don't need to cleaned up like this. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:45, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

This one too: Harries, Karsten (2002). Infinity and Perspective. MIT Press, p. 156. [1] --Akhilleus (talk) 22:50, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

A few more flaws

• To say with such confidence that the Economics of Aristotle is misattributed requires a better source than a hastily read encyclopedia of Italian literature.
  • How do I know it was hasty? Because DBI twice describes Dionigi's commentary as being to the Sententiae of Peter Lombard.
  • On Akhilleus' evidence below, I must conclude that Doug has not even seen the Dizionario, but is relying solely on the abridgement called Medieval Italy. This will not do. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
  • All the notes that cite p. 197 are doubtful; p 197 is the end of the bibliography.
• The citation of Landor is dishonest; all the page says is that Dionigi died soon after Bishop Colonna of Lombes.
• What DBI says about Boccaccio here is that he was (unwillingly) studying letters "at the Campagnian capital (capoluogo campano)" when Dionigi took him in hand, and introduced him to the works of Petrarch, Seneca and Augustine. This rhetoric should be taken with a grain of salt.
  • Wherever this elegant variationist means by Campanian capital, it requires a better source to show it to be Naples.
  • Calling Augustine a "classical author" is subliterate.
• I see no claim in DBI that Dionigi introduced Petrarch to patristic literature. Sacra literatura is the Bible.
• DBI does not say anything about "psychic powers"
• Holloway's outrageous rhetoric about Dionigi's influence is his opinion; it should not be presented as consensus. (More than Augustine or Dante? Come on now.)
  • Augustan was pretentious and silly in Holloway; it is meaningless here. Cicero is not an "Augustan" author. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:20, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Dionigi di Borgo San Sepolcro organized Petrarch’s crowning as poet laureate for the coronation of April 8th, 1341

Found some additional sources and references that may be helpful for this of Dionigi and Giovanni Colonna organizing the coronation of Petrarch's crowning for poet laureate in 1341 here and here. The first additional reference also talks of Dionigi as "....reputed to possess psychic powers." If these additional references are alright with you, then just drop them in as references. Other than these sources and references I have provided, if you feel these are not adequate then go ahead and remove the parts you feel are in dispute. These parts are not necessarily that important to me anyway, then at least there will not be a neutrality or factual dispute because those parts will no longer be there - or they have been further referenced. In either case, the issues will be settled. That should help expidite things to make a good clean article then.--Doug ^talk 20:38, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

• The first linked source, the article on Dionigi in Medieval Italy: an Encyclopedia, says "In addition to his theological studies, he was also greatly interested in classical learning and judicial astrology, and he was even reputed to possess psychic powers." Our article says: "Dionigi was interested in classical studies and was reported to have psychic powers." The footnote is not to Medieval Italy, but to Moschella in DBI. How is this not plagiarism, again? --Akhilleus (talk) 00:47, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
  • It isn't plagiarism, it's academic fraud: the stealing of one's sources' footnotes. Most of us learn in high school to credit the source we have actually consulted, not the further source they credit. Since, as far as I can see, the first linked source is an abridgement of DBI and so manages to be a quaternary source, we should not use it. As for the psychic powers, I do not see them in DBI; where the website got them, I have no idea. They may well be a hash of some interesting medieval legend, but I do not regard them as adequately sourced for now. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:27, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
    • The quotation with false attribtuion is plagiarism ("he was even reputed to possess psychic powers" is a direct quote from Medieval Italy). Stealing other people's footnotes may not be plagiarism (Bill Poser doesn't think so) but "academic fraud" is a fine description. Both problems are present in this bit of text. --Akhilleus (talk) 16:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Plagiarism?

This source, which is from Medieval Italy: an Encyclopedia, ed. Christopher Kleinhenz, has been plagiarized, or nearly so, in a version of this article. Take this old version of the article as a reference point, and compare the following (emphasis added by me):

• Dionigi di Borgo San Sepolcro (born circa 1300, died 1342) was from Sansepolcro near Arezzo. (Wikipedia)
• Dionigi (c. 1300–1342) was born in Sansepolcro, near Arezzo. (Medieval Italy)

In the Wikipedia article I spelled out his name. Sansepolcro is near Arezzo (fact).

• He was an Augustinian scholar of very keen intellect and was much sympathetic towards others. (Wikipedia)
• He entered the Augustinian order at a young age and immediately distinguished himself by his keen intellect and piety. (Medieval Italy)

I believe most scholars will agree that Dionigi had a "keen intellect".

• Dionigi was a scholar trained as an astrologer in Sorbonne as well as a theologian. He received his doctorate circa 1324. (Wikipedia)
• He studied theology at the Sorbonne in Paris and received his doctorate c. 1324. (Medieval Italy)

He did receive his doctorate in 1324 (fact).

• One of Dionigi's works (which since has been lost) is his commentary (circa 1339–1342) on Valerius Maximus’s Factorum et dictorum memorabilium libri. (Wikipedia)
• Almost all of Dionigi’s own writing has been lost. His most famous work is his commentary (probably c. 1339–1342) on Valerius Maximus’s Factorum et dictorum memorabilium libri. (Medieval Italy)

This is a fact also. Do you have a set of other words that might say this better?

• It became a template for subsequent commentaries on Valerius Maximus and also for several of Boccaccio’s reference works such as Esposizioni and Genealogia deorum gentilium. (Wikipedia)
• This commentary, with its many citations of classical authors, became a template not only for subsequent commentaries on Valerius Maximus but also for several of Boccaccio’s nonfictional works, such as Esposizioni and Genealogia deorum gentilium. (Medieval Italy)

It is a fact that it was a "template" for Boccaccio's Esposizioni and Genealogia deorum gentilium.

• Another of Dionigi’s writings is a commentary on the first book of the Sententiae (a treatise on logic) and still another is a commentary on the pseudo Aristotelian Oeconomia. (Wikipedia)
• Dionigi’s other writings include a commentary on the first book of the Sententiae, a treatise on logic, and a commentary on the pseudo-Aristotelian Oeconomia. (Medieval Italy)

It is a fact that Dionogi's writings is a commentary on the first book of the Sententiae (a treatise on logic) and still another is a commentary on the pseudo Aristotelian Oeconomia (which is in Wikipedia as the word "Economics").

And that's just the first two paragraphs of that version of the WP article. In my opinion, this is a clear-cut case of plagiarism and a violation of copyright. Some of this remains in the article, some has been altered; but there's obviously a larger concern of whether there are other instances of plagiarism in the article. I'm not sure how to proceed. --Akhilleus (talk) 21:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Bottomline, I would have to say that this just proves these sources then prove what I am saying and they then make excellent references. Sometimes you have to use the same words (i.e. "keen intellect") to have the same meaning of what you are trying to say. That does not make it plagiarism - it just means you are using a few of the same words. There is just no other way around it - otherwise the meaning gets lost if you use other words. However I will try to find alternate meanings or other words to some of it if you like. In most cases it is one, two, or three words that are the same. Also people's names or works or towns or countries have to be the same (unavoidable).--Doug ^talk 00:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Doug, you're missing the point. This doesn't have anything to do with whether the material is true or false. It has everything to do with whether a copyrighted work has been reproduced without attribution. If you had unconsciously copied the wording of the source in a sentence or two, that's one thing; but you've copied the wording in many sentences, as the list above demonstrates, and there are other instances in the article, as this section above illustrates. In addition, the first two paragraphs in the old version substantially reproduce the substance of the entry in Medieval Italy: an Encyclopedia; even if the text had been altered enough that there were no direct quotes, there is no attribution to the correct source (or any source), which means that this is also plagiarism. --Akhilleus (talk) 00:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, this explains why there was no understanding of what was written by the editor, he didn't write it, someone else did. In fact, most of the problematic sections are simply copyright violations, including the peacockery that I did remove, and the parts that were not properly elaborated. "Intelligent" is what you use in an encyclopedia for "keen intellect," we're not trying to paint a pretty picture, but describe the man. However, I point out that most of the copyvios were removed by me, because of the writing style, so, Doug, it didn't prove that it was necessary to plagiarize, and in fact, it was better unplagiarized. I'm sorry for the few poorly written pieces I left in, which wind up being the remainder of what was plagiarized.[2]

Good catch, Akhilleus, thank you for checking. Aren't libraries wonderful?

However, was the version of the article at its current state a complete copyvio? The history and copyvios must be removed, but I would like to be clear on what was problematic with the current version, how much of a copyright violation was left. KP Botany 21:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

No, several of the sources plagiarized are out of copyright; Landor wrote in 1853; Hollway in 1907. But removing the extracts from Medieval Italy would leave the article unintelligible. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:58, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Dionigi directed Petrarch towards awareness of the importance of Christian patristic literature

Additional reference for this can be found at the Encyclopedia of World Biography on Petrarch on the web here. It is about a third of the way down the article in the section: "Laura and the Canzoniere" in the second paragraph. If that is adequate for you, then just drop that in. Otherwise if you really feel this is not true, then remove the part.--Doug ^talk 21:28, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

• The linked source says: "Upon returning to Avignon, he met the Augustinian scholar Dionigi di Borgo San Sepolcro, who directed him toward a greater awareness of the importance of Christian patristic literature." Our article says "Dionigi directed Petrarch towards awareness of the importance of Christian patristic literature and was Petrarch's spiritual mentor." Nearly exact quote, misleading citation to Moschella. Plagiarism. --Akhilleus (talk) 00:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Petrarch sought out the older scholar while travelling abroad.

Perhaps a better representation and reference for this can be found on page 288 of the same reference that makes it more clear:

At Paris he met Dionigi de' Ruperti, an Augustine monk, born in Borgo San Sepolcro, near Florence, and esteemed as one of the most learned, eloquent, philosophical and religious men in France. To him Petrarch wrote earnestly for counsel...."

Then on page 294 (the actual reference) it says: Another friend, more advanced in years, Dionigi di Borgo San Sepolcro, soon followed.

From these references I then came up with the above wording for the article. Perhaps I should have put in also page 288 also to make it more clear. If this is adequate for you, please correct by adding page 288 to the reference. At the time I put it in I was pointing out that Dionigi was older than Petrarch and this is is why I used the wording "the older scholar" (which is similar on page 294)- however perhaps I should have included page 288 also to point out that Dionigi was known as a scholar. Thanks for noticing.--Doug ^talk 22:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

This source does not support the idea that Petrarch "sought out" Dionigi. --Akhilleus (talk) 01:03, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Dionigi became Boccaccio's unofficial personal instructor and was a mentor to both Petrarch and Boccaccio.

The reference for this is here that points out Dionigi was a mentor to both Boccaccio and Petrarch. I can only go with what the reference says - do you question this reference then?--Doug ^talk 22:48, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

He introduced Boccaccio to the works of classical authors like Augustine of Hippo, as well as others.

On this source it says:

The young Giovanni Boccaccio studied canon law at the studio in Naples, and Dionigi became his unofficial tutor, introducing him to the works of Augustine, Petrarch, and the classical authors.

I believe the two are saying essentially the same thing. Is this adequate that Dionigi introduced works of classical writers to Boccaccio?--Doug ^talk 23:10, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Augustine is not always considered a classical author. The source you're quoting doesn't consider Augustine classical; that's why it says "Augustine, Petrarch, and the classical authors." Note that the sentence in the Wikipedia article is a close copy of the clause in the source you're quoting. Please respond to the section about plagiarism above. --Akhilleus (talk) 23:32, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Cutting and pasting

There are several reasons why cutting and pasting from a published source is irresponsible and unacceptable.

• It can easily be a copyright violation: Medieval Italy was published in 2004, and is copyright.
• It is rude to authors to take their words; in the case of Medieval Italy, it is also economic injury: the book is still in print for $395.00.
• It produces bad writing. Take the sentence: The Augustinian monk Dionigi influenced Petrarch's intellect and character more than anyone Petrarch met in relation to the Christian faith and the Augustan culture. taken from Holloway's

Fra Dionigi's influence was the strongest ever brought to bear on Petrarch's mind and character; as we have seen, he knew how to foster his penitent's religious enthusiasm without impairing his zeal for secular learning, and to his wise advice it must be largely due that Petrarch neither sacrificed his intellect on the altar of fanaticism, nor forgot the Christian faith in reviving Augustan culture.

The original here is entirely conjecture. It is not difficult to check that "we have" not "seen" any such thing; Holloway has presented no evidence of Dionigi's counsel, for the excellent reason that no evidence of Petrarch's dealings with his confessor survives - as it should not.

It is also a failed effort at elegant writing, but at least here the antithesis Christian/Augustan has some point. Our text uses the circumlocution Augustan with no point.

The idea of Wikipedia is to read the sources, understand them, and explain; not to parrot their verbiage. Surely Doug Coldwell has heard the old instruction: "explain this in your own words"; can he do so? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Rereading this talk page convinces me that the plagiarism is hopeless and pervasive; and exists equally in the first version. I shall be rewriting, from Moschella; but none of the existing versions are acceptable Wikipedia content. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:19, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, that answers my question above. Your solution is fine, thank you. This (your actually writing it) will make it easier for me to question what you write, should the need arise.

I don't think there's any use in explaining to folks why you can't copy from others, those who don't see simply won't see it, and there's not much that can be done, but all of Doug's articles should now be checked for the same issue, this does concern me. Thanks for the work, PMAnderson.KP Botany 21:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Some info

Not sure if you can make use of this, but here's some info:

• Took, John. (March 22, 2003) Medium Aevum Zygmunt Baranski, Chiosar con altro testo: leggere Dante nel Trecento. Volume 72; Issue 1; Page 160. (Writing, "What Baranski himself brings to all this--in the course of an essay, it has to be said, remarkably forbearing in the circumstances--is some useful clarification when it comes to the specifically bibliographical aspect of the Maramauro text, massively indebted at this point to Dionigi da Borgo San Sepolcro's commentary on Valerius Maximus but massively inept even so in making use of it.")
• Didier, Peron. (May 23, 2003) Libération Voyages Mont Ventoux Pic épique Etape mythique du Tour de France, le mont Ventoux a autant fasciné les écrivains que les grimpeurs. Randonnée méditativesur les traces de Pétrarque. Issue 6850, Section: Guide (writing, " En 1336, Pétrarque, poète, moraliste, diplomate, exilé depuis l'enfance d'Italie à Vaucluse, rédige un texte splendide (1), une lettre à un ami, le père Dionigi da Borgo San Sepolcro, professeur de théologie, qu'il insère dans un vaste recueil épistolaire en latin, les Familiares.")
• Comadira, Narcis. (April 1, 2004) Diario El Pais (Spain). Unica: L'ascenció al mont Ventós. Section: Unica; Page 7. (writing, "Així comença la narració que fa de l'ascenció al seu amic Dionigi Roberti da Borgo San Sepolcro, frare agustí que el va iniciar a la lectura del bisbe d'Hipona.")
• Velli, Giuseppe. (December 22, 2005) Italica. Petrarch's Epystole * Volume 82; Issue 3-4, Page 366.
• Cannarsa, Aurelia. (June 22, 2006) Italica. Versum efficit ipsa relatio contrariorum: il modello agostiniano del dissidio in Petrarca. Volume 83; Issue 2; Page 147. (writing, "Per comprendere pienamente la portata del rapporto tra Sant' Agostino e Petrarca occorre continuare attraverso la lettura della nota e gia citata lettera indirizzata all'agostiniano Dionigi da Borgo San Sepolcro."
• Winkler, von Willi. (December 30, 2006) Süddeutsche Zeitung Es war einmal: Petrarca und die Entdeckung des Ich. Section: SZ Wochenende; Page 6. (writing" In einem Brief an seinen väterlichen Freund Francesco Dionigi von Borgo San Sepolcro legt er Zeugnis ab von dieser Erweckung, die ihm oben auf dem Berg zuteil wurde.")

-- Jreferee ^(Talk) 19:39, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks; the Libération article says that Petrarch wrote his letter on the Ascent of Mont Ventoux to Dionigi, which we have. Press comments on Mont Ventoux are unlikely to say more. Some of the others may be interesting, and there is a list of comments on the letter, which belong in that article, on p.137 of Rereading the Renaissance by Carol Quillen. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Spelling of the DBI

Isn't it Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani (with an f not ph in Biogra.ico?) or is this a different work? Won't make the change myself since google turns up hits for (maybe two different) works under both spellings. Carlossuarez46 17:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Biografico; thanks. The web is probably reflecting the same spelling error: the imposition of English and Latin spelling on Italian. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:24, 13 July 2007 (UTC)