Talk:Pope John XXIII and Judaism

Christianity: Catholicism Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Catholic Church portal This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (assessed as Mid-importance).

European Microstates: Vatican City Low‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Microstates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of European Microstates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European MicrostatesWikipedia:WikiProject European MicrostatesTemplate:WikiProject European MicrostatesEuropean Microstates articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Vatican City portal This article is supported by WikiProject Vatican City (assessed as Mid-importance).

Source of questionable reliability

http://www.raoulwallenberg.net/?en/press/pope-john-xxiii-jews.1709.htm Pope John XXIII and the Jews - which currently goes straight to http://www.raoulwallenberg.net/roncalli/articles-11/pope-john-xxiii-jews/ - is currently the source for several of nuncio Roncalli (later Pope John XXIII)'s reported activities in defence of Jews during World War II. That source article quotes no sources of its own, and tells us 'the ship arrived in Jerusalem'. Before I realised this was in the source, I corrected that to 'the ship arrived in Palestine'. However, now that I realise Jerusalem is in our 'reliable' source, I feel that perhaps I should have left it as it was, and simply added a sentence such as 'As this is authoritatively asserted by an article at the website of the prestigious Raoul Wallenberg Foundation, and as Jerusalem is many miles from the coast, this event must be viewed as the greatest miracle to have occurred in the Holy City, at least since Muhammad arrived there on a flying donkey Buraq in 632 AD, and the information should be passed on to the relevant Catholic authorities, as one of the miracles needed to bring about Roncalli's beatification and/or canonization, along with, in the noble cause of interfaith reconciliation, similar information needed to bring about the beatification and canonization of Saint Muhammad and/or of his flying donkey Saint Buraq.'

Writing 'Jerusalem' instead of 'Palestine' may just be a slip of the pen, but the fact that it has not been corrected in the original indicates that at the very least that document is a rather careless and under-checked one. I leave it to editors with greater experience than mine to decide what to do about this 'reliable' source, though I will for now try to add 'the reliability of this source has been questioned in the Talk page' to the citation, though even if I succeed in doing so, I'm not sure whether that's adequate. Tlhslobus (talk) 13:44, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this deserves making the resource unreliable. Given that nobody since 17 October 2012 was able to corroborate (or dispute, true) the above text, I suggest to remove the marks of questionability on the main page. I can clearly imagine that ship arriving in Jerusalem may be very well the similar hyperbole as when I now say that I would fly to Jerusalem. Of course, I fly to the Ben Gurion International Airport in Tel Aviv and then drive to Jerusalem by bus, car or something, yes it is not absolutely precise terminology, but I don't think it is a big deal. Moreover, the original source of the article is actually http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=11727 which seems to be rather pro-Jewish website, so I wouldn't expect much pro-Catholic bias on their pages.

Ceplm (talk) 15:34, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]