User talk:Felix Folio Secundus/Church history, architecture and science

Chauncy Maples

Thank you for your work on dividing the article: it looks much better now.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 16:28, 13 September 2009 (UTC) (to Wwheaton)

Hi, I will try to take a look, and respond as time allows. Unfortunately this is pretty far off my main line of expertise and knowledge, so I probably will not be able to do much either. Anyway, I will keep both articles watch-listed. Thanks, Wwheaton (talk) 17:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I have made a feeble effort and restoring us to two articles. I reverted User:Anments (talk)'s last two edits and edited enough to make the scope of each article clear, as well as leaving parallel explanatory messages on both article talk pages. I also left Anments a message asking him to refrain from altering the scope without consensus on the talk pages. I also hard-coded in an "otheruses" msg on the article about the person, as the otheruses4 template was misbehaving and producing a red link, probably a side effect of the mix-up. If you get a chance to shuffle material around that would be good, as I think it needs work, As you say, the material is fairly large and complex, and I have no expertise at all beyond what has been in the article(s). Cheers, Wwheaton (talk) 19:14, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So "two heads are better than one" it seems, proved once again; and we are a co-operative species, on which much of our success depends. Hope Anments is OK with it all, we'll see. Cheers, Bill Wwheaton (talk) 20:59, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Antonio del Corro and others: "Inquisition book of somebody"

Hi you have written this on my talk-site: Re: Reginaldus Gonsalvius Montanus. The Antonio del Corro article maintains that he is Reginaldus. I left this comment there "Different opinion: there is now a new article at Reginaldus Gonsalvius Montanus which expresses a different view.... Perhaps you could investigate this.

Ok, I study a little bit theologie. So I came from this side to the article: Reginaldus Gonsalvius Montanus. Step 1: First I have written the german article and an english Revision of Reina-Valera. (By this work I looked on the spanish wikipedia-site). Step II. I made the german site of Casiodoro de Reina and an english revision. (By this work I looked again on the spanish wikipedia-site). On the history of this site Casiodoro de Reina I can see that you have seen this. (Thanks for the mistake correction.) On the word "rigidity" in this article you can see that somebody (before me) used the spanish wikipedia site of this article. This sentence: ... rigidity of the Consistory to be salutary. I suppose is not very good to understand.

So, you have seen that this information was on this site before I came. But now Sources were I find this oppinion too:

1. Erich Wenneker: REINA, Cassiodoro di. In: Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon (BBKL). Band 7, Herzberg 1994, ISBN 3-88309-048-4, Sp. 1524–1528.

look on the section works of the article Cassiodoro de Reina.

2. in the text: [http://www.ritmanlibrary.nl/c/r/pdf/castellio_widerstand1-gilly.pdf PDF: Sebastan Castellio und der politische Widerstand gegen Philipp II. von Spani

you can read that this is common error - can you german?

(in Hermann Dechent: Reina. In: Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie (ADB). Band 27, Duncker & Humblot, Leipzig 1888, S. 720–723. a very good source, is nothing to read about the inquistion etc.)

now I will look into the internet to find something about the problem. (my next article would be a german site about the mathew bible).

mfg Soenke Rahn with friendly greetings Soenke Rahn (talk) 14:24, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, now I have made revisions of the articles: Reginaldus Gonsalvius Montanus and Antonio del Corro. I hope it's Ok so. To the: "... It would be hard for me to read the Spanish and my German is only a little vocabulary. ...", I suppose that I can help if there are questions. with friendly greetings Soenke Rahn (talk) 14:24, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I looked to the article Antonio del Corro. A lot of changes. But I suppose that this article has a lot of mistakes. I hope that I will find the time to translate the article next week. Then I will see. Yes my citation is an old one, but yes there are a lot of standards and sigh ... sigh, sigh. The last two days I have made an article to David Daniell (an Oxford-Prof(essor)) - I have made a translation under: David Daniell (author). Possible you can look about it. with friendly greetings --Soenke Rahn (talk) 23:51, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, yes his birthday, but I don't found him in my books or in the Internet. Possible, anybody will find his birthday in the book: Who is who?. Living person - yes that sound possible but David Daniell is very old and since a long time in pension. But, yes it's possible to say he is a living person. Ok, the thing with the thesis. Yes, words are instruments, but it's true that from on university to an another these instruments are different, in Germany too. But in German These would be the right word because: A well known theses are the 95 Theses of Martin Luther. This is a good example for Thesis. About a thesis you can hold a discussion and if you don't believe the thesis you have to falsificate it. You have to say, why is the thesis false. So is it with this thesis too. David Daniell says it's clear that he is right, but he comes with pieces of circumstantial evidences (german Indizien) and not with evidences. So you can say it's possible that he is right. (By the way, and this is nothing for Wikipedia - he makes mistakes I know it because he translated here and there german texts false, and so on) Ok, in the article to the Matthew bible wrote that this thesis so are it's Facts, but I think that's not right and not false. Opinion for thesis would be, I think not good ... because it's to soft. In german These = thesis is the rigt word. We don't use thesis often, and it may be that there exist a lot of definitions in germany too, but I suppose for a german text it's the right word. I looked in my New Oxford English Dictionary, but thesis seems to be right. Other dictionarys says the same. Ok, possible you are right and you have a better idea. ... Morrow I will see that I will make the german translation to the Mathew Bible. The Mathew Bible is very beautiful book, with fine images. I have a facsimile.--Soenke Rahn (talk) 23:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks the David Daniell article looks better now. Good work! The Who's Who I put in the section with the general sources (or general references) not into the section with the notes. I think this would be OK so. But I can not make it precise. The same is it with the book of Fox. The footnote with the booktitle was a revision of me. I am sure that the writer of this sentence means this book. The book is often quoted in this context. So it is clear. But in the moment I can not say which edition and page and so on. Very good link to Casiodoro de Reina, I will put it to the external links. But such section would be interesing for books which are not a source, but a advice to read. The question to "evangelic" / "evangelical" is a little delicate and complex topic. Write me an email I will answer. Ineresting Link: Stephen Joseph Studio. I will see that I will make a translation of this site. Is Manchester beautiful? wfg. --Soenke Rahn (talk) 17:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bede, the Venerable

Felicitous catch, Felix. It looks like some ambitious and knowledgeable editor should move much of the discussion of the HE into the Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum article, and provide a summary in this article that focuses on those elements that show how the HE embodies/reflects Bede's achievements and less on the HE itself. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 20:59, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Above = one reply to my comment re Hist Eccles translations; Ealdgyth responded also.

Anton Pilgram

Hello Felix. Thanks for your copyedit of my creaky English. I appreciate it. The article still isn't complete, I can't find an important article in the Czech magazine "Art", summarizing current research. They don't have it in my favourite library :( Have a nice day. Antonín Vejvančický (talk) 07:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Czech title of magazine "Art" is "Umění". It's published in Czech/German/English, unfortunately this article (No. 5, 2004) is in Czech language. Thanks for pointing out the problem with the term "author", I fixed it. --Vejvančický (talk) 13:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bunsen

Nice article, I never knew much about his contributions & character. Thanks! Wwheaton (talk) 22:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weimarer Ausgabe

Moin Moin (how we say in the north of Germany for good morning), Yes, the article to the Weimarer Ausgabe looks better now. Thanks for the revision and mistake correction. I suppose that the list of content is not complete so I suppose that your correction " - Z" is not right. But, I will go to the library and will see what is. ... - The evangelic, evangelical and Lutheran - definition on the german wikipedia site "evangelisch" and "Evangelikalismus" I think is not complete and so not quite right. By the way, the anglican church has an lutheran theology, with a lutheran tradition, but is not a lutheran church. Typical lutheran would be the usage of the small catechism of Martin Luther. But the theology is in the sense of Martin Luther and so it is an evangelic church. But how I say the definition is a difficult problem, and I have good reasons that I will not write in the wikipedia about this problem, because to say the right think is sometimes false and language is changing. ... The town were I live, Flensburg is a little town on the border to denmark. Today the sun is shining, but often the weather is wet, too - this is the autumn. I suppose that you now that England means Land of Angles. The region round about Flensburg is called Angeln. So you can say that I live in Angelnland. (This etymology) with friendly greetings --Soenke Rahn (talk) 11:26, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mügeln and Heinrich von Mügeln

Hello Felix, I looked on the article. The first version is like the version which you have edited. The first version comes from an antonym User-IP. I saw that the word "lock" should be castle. This is interesting because: lock means Schloss, schließen. But German Schloss means, how I say, castle too. The etymological explanation is that a castle locked (in medieval times) a street into a valley etc. (so that robbers had no chance to kill people in the dale). Nobody, which learns a little bit English, would translate this (so) false. So I suppose this translation was made by (or with) a translation machine, like the babel fish. (I gave this statement in my minor edit of this article.) I suppose it would be the best when you will send me the article with underscored (not readable) passages or if it is not to big, place the passages on my discussion-site. I am not sure, but I suppose that 30 percent or more of this article is not readable for an English native speaker. Are you interested on the German article to Heinrich von Mügeln? I like the Middle High German Topic. It would be interesting for me to translate this article into English.--Soenke Rahn (talk) 22:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Felix, I editied the Mügeln site a second time. Sometimes I laughed about the false babel fish translation of the article. In the moment in Flensburgh it is dark and it rains again. And it is windy and cold. - ask again - best greetings --Soenke Rahn (talk) 18:54, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now, I edited the Railway-Section of the Article. Today, I translated the Stephen Joseph Studio Article into German. I found nothing of Interest: 1. a book: The Making of Manchester Jewry, 1740-1875; (Author: Bill Williams), page: 334 (something to H. E. Marotsky): http://books.google.de/books?id=-hoNAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA334&lpg=PA334&dq=H.+E.+Marotsky+Manchester+Pastor&source=bl&ots=4Q9izOo-ap&sig=uFoL8g2AR3EF8sby6Z3dp77Jvtg&hl=de&ei=48XYSq72E9TG_gbOxOyUAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CA4Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=&f=falseand 2. a dedication to Martsky: http://www.archive.org/stream/moderngreeklangu00gelduoft/moderngreeklangu00gelduoft_djvu.txt

but now it exist a German translation, with friendly greetings --Soenke Rahn (talk) 19:41, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Felix, in the moment I am busy, because the semester begins at the university in Flensburg and I am sitting on two big more important articles. But, yes I will make the edits. I have made me a note on my user page (Benutzerseite). Next time, you may made me directly a note on my Benutzerseite. In the moment the weather is better again in Flensburg. with friendly greetings Sönke--Soenke Rahn (talk) 22:27, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the moment I am sitting in the library of the university Flensburgh. And I looked in our Weimarer Ausgabe I am astound that the volumes 62 until 72 are not exist in the library Flensburg. I supposed that the edition would be complete. But now (in the next time, because I will be here and there in the library) I will place some more informations about the Weimarer Ausgabe into the Wikipedia. --Soenke Rahn (talk) 19:38, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Felix, this was very nice. Your translation is useful. I have made some changes again. This week I will (or 'must' because it is hurry) make German articles to Lutherfilms. Later I will translate these articles into English. So I suppose, that I will make the next changes on the Weimarer-Ausgabe article in ca. 2 weeks. Possible you will look about the artice again. You know my Englsh ... with friendly greetings Sönke --Soenke Rahn (talk) 11:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Felix, I have placed an English article again. This article was one of my first attempts (in the sense try-out) to write an wikipedia article. In the moment I am a little bit frustrated, sorry. Possibly you can look swiftly about it. Another think, do you know something about facsimiles to King Arthur books? with friendly greetings, --Soenke Rahn (talk) 21:13, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History of Christianity

I have been dividing the overlong article into three: I would have made notes at the end of the first article pointing forward, etc.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 05:20, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is a bit too bold. Please discuss first at Talk: History of Christianity and seek WP:CON. Thanks. ^{Carlaude:Talk} 05:25, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please move History of Christianity back to that location. While we could split it in three-- Wikipedia does need a main article on the History of Christianity. ^{Carlaude:Talk} 05:29, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So, Felix Folio Secundus, how about moving History of early Christianity to Early history of Christianity, and then recreating Medieval history of Christianity and Modern history of Christianity , but sure leave this page intact (except you are more than welcome to help cut its lenght and add links to the new article.) It would seem best to me to let the Modern history of Christianity cover the time after that covered by the Reformation/Counter-Reformation articles. (Please reply on that talk page.) ^{Carlaude:Talk} 11:22, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The most useful one would probably be the Modern history of Christianty from the Enlightenment till the present time. The Middle Ages are perhaps not so good a way of describing ecclesiastical history and the overlaps might be hard to manage. Concern has been expressed by others that the Christianity by centuries articles are not a good idea but eliminating them would also be a considerable task. I will not do anything immediately and hope to consider it later. Your slimmer version of the main article is certainly a move in the right direction.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 12:35, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's apprpriate to have a comment about Islam in the very first paragraph in an article concerned mainly and primarily about Christianity in the 21st century. It just seems downright obsessive and nasty, since there seems to be an unhealthy fixation about Muslims in certain academic and intellectual circles. There are also many other religions such as Buddhism, Hinduism and Judaism that are in a deep mode of opposition to Christianity at the present time. On the contrary, I feel that it is not so much other religions that pose a threat to Christianity, but rather radical secularism and liberalism, who simply want to annihilate religion altogether in a new post-modern globalist political sphere known as the New World Order. ADM (talk) 12:47, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Velislav Bible

File:Stvorenisveta velislav.jpg:- The correct English translation is 'Creation of the World - Velislav Bible'. --Vejvančický (talk) 22:32, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beatus of Liébana

I have been doing some work on the Beatus of Liébana articles and found your message on Talk:Beatus of Liébana. Perhaps you could look through the changes and let me know what you think. (Both the German and Spanish articles on the Commentary are very detailed.)--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 19:04, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I know nothing that could help you. I came across this page as part of an exercise to rationalize WP with EB1911, and EB was the only place from which I knew anything about him. Ahd this was over 2 years ago, I see. Good luck; I welcome any and all additions to WP for these out-of-the-way topics! David Brooks (talk) 19:26, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message. I think I have got about as far as I can with this now. It can either be improved by someone with special knowledge of medieval art or by a lot of translation from the French, Spanish or German articles.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Diocesan arms

No luck with an illustrator yet taking up your request. You could try emailing a man that as done some heraldic work on Wikipedia before, though his work has all disappeared and I do not know where it has went. His account looks blocked, but his website says he can be reached at xander@alexanderliptak.com.
Η936631 (talk) 06:09, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

bLackthorrn (sloes)

Felix, I am not sure why you left that note on my talk page. I am not quite meself since I had a bit of a bash on the head and a door fell out of a loft ant caught me. But I remembered that sloes were from the blackthorn (we don't seem to have any around here but had stacjks where I used to live, the other end of Cambridgeshire, in all the hedges, and this is certainly the time to go picking them for your christmas sloe gin) just don't remember the original discussion how you got to telling me about it. Was it from RfD there was Sloe vs. slow but I think even then I am not sure why you would say on my talk page instead of just on there.

My sincere best wishes. I am getting better, nearly there, nothing to worry about just a bash on the bonce. Si Trew (talk) 11:15, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have managed to finally get Voguéo fixed up and in main, though needs quite a bit of repair. Si Trew (talk) 11:17, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sharpe, Paley and Austin

Thanks for adding the Further reading section. Did you know that Geoff Brandwood has written a more detailed book on the practice, (The Architecture of Sharpe, Paley and Austin by Geoff Brandwood with Tim Austin, John Hughes and Jim Price) which is due to be published next February? (Information given me by John Hughes). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:03, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ichthus: January 2012

ICHTHUS

January 2012

In this issue...

Ichthus is the newsletter of Christianity on Wikipedia • It is published by WikiProject Christianity
For submissions contact the Newsroom • To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here

Religious communities

Thank you for your recent contributions to Former religious orders in the Anglican Communion. I have, however, reverted one and re-written another, and wanted to explain why. Your first edit was to provide a wikilink on the title 'Ewell Monastery', but the Ewell Monastery page is simply a redirect back to the page you were editing. It is Wikipedia policy not to provide wikilinks that simply direct the browser back to the page it is already on. Secondly you provided a lot of extra information under the heading 'Sisterhood of the Epiphany' (SE), but the order you were writing about was actually a different order named the 'Community of the Epiphany' (CE). The CE, based in Truro, and the SE, based in Bangladesh, had no connection other than the coincidence of similar names. I have corrected the error for you, and I have also corrected the same error at the page Convent of the Epiphany. I am aware that there is at least one incorrect source on the internet which makes the same confusion, but the actual facts are clear from the official website of the Anglican Communion, and from a majority of sources. Indeed, the sources you yourself quoted from the press clearly referred to the Community of the Epiphany. Timothy Titus ^{Talk To TT} 03:33, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did understand these to be two separate orders; the Cornish Church Guide (an official diocesan publication) of 1925 uses the name "Sisterhood of the Epiphany" and "Home of the Epiphany" for the convent, so there has probably been a later change.Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 16:55, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have a history of the Community, and as far as I can see it has never changed its name. I suspect the 1925 diocesan guide simply made an error. It's easily done - in fact my own 2012 diocesan guide is sitting on my desk, and is full of errors! The human condition... Interestingly, also, the history only refers to the mother house as "Convent of the Epiphany" although the sisters' branch house in Japan (which they ran there for over 40 years) was called "Home of the Epiphany". Best wishes, Timothy Titus ^{Talk To TT} 17:49, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weltstadthaus (Cologne)

hello, the layout changes you made, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weltstadthaus_%28Cologne%29&diff=503636216&oldid=442528992, are not an unmitigated success, i feel. At least, on my screen, the references are now weirdly wrapped around the lone image on the left, whereas before the entire text was couched between images on the left and right. Would you like to take another shot at it? cheers, Doceddi (talk) 21:54, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Benson

I don't know what the deleted image was, and as it was deleted on Commons I can't check. If it was this one then this page says it was painted by Hubert von Herkomer, died 1914, which should be long enough ago to be usable. Regards, Bencherlite ^Talk 13:12, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest explaining the situation to the deleting Commons admin at Commons:User talk:Fastily, who if s/he's happy with your explanation can simply undelete the picture so that the appropriate tags can be added. Bencherlite ^Talk 14:46, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry not to reply earlier, but I think everything's sorted now, isn't it? Bencherlite ^Talk 01:10, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Anglican navbox colour discussion

Hullo, dear Felix! We're having a discussion about the colours of Anglicanism navboxes. Please do come along and weigh in. D B D 18:15, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added a suggestion there 30/11/12.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:30, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting comment on name change

Should we change Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore to Saint Mary Major? I am targetting folk who have altered the entry before. Rococo1700 (talk) 04:43, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

St James the Great, East St Kilda

I would like to thank you for your assistance in getting this article up and running. I have been doing a bit of work on it (basically as a break from my thesis) and would appreciate any help advice as I bash it into shape. Adamm 09:02, 25 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamm (talk • contribs)

And this is a case in point - I signed my entry with the 4 tildes.... and yet the bot goes crazy.... Adamm 09:12, 25 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamm (talk • contribs) Worked it out Adamm 08:26, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]