Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 16:35, 3 July 2006 editStr1977 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers59,114 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit		Revision as of 17:09, 3 July 2006 edit undoKing Vegita (talk \| contribs)2,688 edits ArbitrationNext edit →
Line 87:		Line 87:

	I see now you were referring to the Austria's (not the Spanish) COA. WHich collapses your case: why is there a Black Legend about Spain, when in fact Austria wanted to rule the world? Which BTW is just one of the countless (literally about 100) ways of reading the actual motto: AEIOU. This was the preferred sign of Emperpor Frederick III (Charles's grandfather), a rather powerless ruler. Maybe it no meaning at all and just combined all the vowels. Anyway, your picture caption is incorrect: neither does the COA pictures contain the motto, nor does the motto say what you claim (it just says AEIOU), nor has it anything to do with Spain and the Black Legend. So it's OR at best. ] ] 16:35, 3 July 2006 (UTC)		I see now you were referring to the Austria's (not the Spanish) COA. WHich collapses your case: why is there a Black Legend about Spain, when in fact Austria wanted to rule the world? Which BTW is just one of the countless (literally about 100) ways of reading the actual motto: AEIOU. This was the preferred sign of Emperpor Frederick III (Charles's grandfather), a rather powerless ruler. Maybe it no meaning at all and just combined all the vowels. Anyway, your picture caption is incorrect: neither does the COA pictures contain the motto, nor does the motto say what you claim (it just says AEIOU), nor has it anything to do with Spain and the Black Legend. So it's OR at best. ] ] 16:35, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

			== Arbitration ==

			I've taken our dispute to arbitration:

			http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Christianity

Revision as of 17:09, 3 July 2006

Welcome, but be warned: Enter at your own risk.

Welcome to the Misplaced Pages

I noticed you were new, and wanted to share some links I thought useful:

Notes:

The link to the POV-section template is {{POV-section}}.
{{subst:test3}} is preferred.
Errors that need correction should be treated like <strike>this</strike>.

Questions and comments

Pope Pius XII

I know we've had our disagreements on this article in the past, but I'd like to invite you to come back to the article and read over it again. Your user page says you are a historian, and I have been unable to find sufficient information on:

Pius's canonization track--I know that he is now Venerable (step 2) but I was unable to find any information like which Pope's had promoted him to each level and whether there is any verifiable information on how that process is proceeding.
Pius's postwar activities--I know that he was quite instrumental in the Cold War, but the only author who discusses this in depth is Phayer and he makes the error reading Pius's Cold War activities as intertwined with his calls for amnesty to war criminals (unfortunately, because he quotes uncritically other historians who later went on to place Pius in a conspiracy with Stalin and Hitler, most other works I have read regard this portion of his work as erronious, although his book is otherwise highly regarded).
The Pontifical Aid Commission--although it gets 147,000 google hits, they are all copy-and-paste jobs from this site which I have found to be unreliable given their very selective summary of his "profile". The PAC is not listed in the index of any of the 11 books on Pius that I currently have in my possession. I you know of any published sources which discuss it, it seems like it might be a significant omission.

In addition to these three things, I would also obviously like your feedback on the more controversial sections. I think that we should dump the "Other views" section, along with the deluge of information which is not germane to Pius into a subartile perhaps titled Pope Pius XII and World War II, Pope Pius XII and the Holocaust, Catholic Church and World War II, or Catholic Church and the Holocaust, whichever seems more appropriate (I would favor creating the later two no matter what and the first two only if there so much information which is too tangential for the main Pope Pius XII article that we need them as daughter articles for the last two.

In addition to commenting on the articles, could you please hit me back on my talk page, by email, or on AIM (c6o6s6m6o). I think this article is close to Featured Article status if we can get the three main omissions that I mentioned hammered out as well as the more controversial sections. savidan 18:48, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Could you please hit me up on the talk page about your most recent revert? savidan 01:52, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Pope Pius XII FAC

Hope your wikibreak was restful. I nominated Pope Pius XII to be a Featured Article. As you are one of the perennial contributors to the article and the talk page, I would appreciate your comments at the nomination page linked above, whether or not you choose to join me in supporting the article. savidan 22:45, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The second scan that you uploaded didn't come up for me (and I guess that was the important one!). Anyway, as I said, its not a problem, and I look forward to dealing with your comments specifically. savidan 15:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Theodo I and II

I just wanted to ask why you decided to combine Theodo I and II of Bavaria. There seems to be some evidence that there were two: One as the son of Garibald and the other Garibald's grandson. See http://www.mittelalter-genealogie.de/agilolfinger/familie_der_agilolfinger.html Agilofinger. imars 10:50, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your inquiry. I was aware of the link have studied it comprehensively. The thing is, that there is no evidence and no reason from the sources to assume the Duke Theodo mentioned in Emmeram's vita to be a different Theodo than the one mentioned in Paulus Diaconus, Corbianian's vita or in other sources. The distinction is merely a historians' construct that, to my knowledge, is no longer widespread. The only argument for it is that Lantpert and Uta are not mentioned in necrologies of Theodo's family (where the four sons are mentioned). That however might be because of their involvement with Emmeram's death. The thing about the fathers is that we have no reliable notice about whose son Theodo was. These are mere speculations. This, BTW, is also what the link tells us: if you follow the link to Theodo I you will find an almost empty page, whereas all the information is at

Makes sense to me. Thanks for the explanation! --imars 10:23, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Mediation Cabal (Christianity)

I was skimming through the Christianity case because it looked like the mediators involved were unsure of what they were doing and noticed that activity dropped after a certain point. Skimming through, it doesn't look like any compromise was reached and that discussion became less and less productive as time went on. Therefore, I'd like to know what came of it. Has the discussion migrated elsewhere or has it been resolved? If you are still open to mediation, I'd be happy to take a stab. Cheers! --Keitei (talk) 19:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for not readding the tag. Can you explain the book thing on the section of the talk page that I started. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt since that source was added recently as well. savidan 14:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Black Legend

The Black Legend (in Spanish, La leyenda negra) is the disparaging depiction of Spain and Spaniards as bloodthirsty and cruel, intolerant, greedy and fanatical.

For you this,is not over exageration?Like if the other european powers where saints.The section you cut out ,wher trying to explane,why all this fuss about the spanish.the hasburg coat of arms is saying ta he will rule the world,if you where a king in that era,whouldn't you be felling menased?You whouldn't whant to respond? User:87.65.174.220

Thanks for your query!

First of all, the ssections were linguistically substandard.
They were also not clear as to the point. In other words: not concise enough so that one could understand.
It is not up to us or WP to increase understanding towards those inventing a legend and to take their sides, or to talk likes there were rules that justified that. Balance of power "breached" sounds like that Spain violated a rule in existence, when in fact a) there was no such rule, and b) other nations did the same.
We also shouldn't make wrong claims about coats of arms and alleged plans for world conquests. Such plans are already Black Legend. Remember, Charles V did not try to conquer France but made a treaty with Francis I, even though the breach in fidelity was foreseeable.
Lastly, what were the 300 years about. Habsburg Spain ended around 1700; minus 300 makes 1400: there was no Spain in 1400. Str1977 16:27, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I see now you were referring to the Austria's (not the Spanish) COA. WHich collapses your case: why is there a Black Legend about Spain, when in fact Austria wanted to rule the world? Which BTW is just one of the countless (literally about 100) ways of reading the actual motto: AEIOU. This was the preferred sign of Emperpor Frederick III (Charles's grandfather), a rather powerless ruler. Maybe it no meaning at all and just combined all the vowels. Anyway, your picture caption is incorrect: neither does the COA pictures contain the motto, nor does the motto say what you claim (it just says AEIOU), nor has it anything to do with Spain and the Black Legend. So it's OR at best. Str1977 16:35, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Arbitration

I've taken our dispute to arbitration:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Christianity

Misplaced Pages

User talk:Str1977: Difference between revisions