| Revision as of 08:13, 4 May 2006 editRobdurbar (talk | contribs)11,477 edits →Great Britain: island← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 13:55, 27 December 2024 edit undoUltraodan (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers1,265 edits →Semi-protected edit request on 24 December 2024 |
| (655 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{WikiProject Saints}} |
|
{{talk header}} |
|
|
{{ArticleHistory |
|
{{oldpeerreview}} |
|
|
|
|action1=PR |
|
|
|action1date=14 March 2006 |
|
|
|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Saint Patrick/archive1 |
|
|
|action1result=reviewed |
|
|
|action1oldid= |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|action2=PR |
|
==Celtic Language?== |
|
|
|
|action2date=02:07, 15 September 2007 |
|
|
|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Saint Patrick/archive2 |
|
|
|action2result=reviewed |
|
|
|action2oldid=157710516 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|action3=GAN |
|
It says in the article that after St. Patrick was captured he began to learn "the Celtic language." It is commonly agreed among Irish historians that the Irish are not actually Celtic (e.g. the Irish learned the Celtic style of art from communication with the European mainland, etc.). So did they speak the Celt language? I defer to an expert on this one. {{unsigned|User:24.226.16.47}} |
|
|
|
|action3date=20 September 2007 |
|
|
|action3result=listed |
|
|
|action3oldid=158868403 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|action4=GAR |
|
:To be more precise, what the article means is that he learned "a ]" or "the ]". Patrick would have already spoken a ] and some Latin. Depending on exactly where he came from in Britain, he might have known a Goidelic language as well. ] and ] explain how Goidelic and Brythonic may have been related to each other and to other Celtic languages. ] ] 00:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|action4date=12 January 2010 |
|
|
|action4result=delisted |
|
|
|action4link=Talk:Saint Patrick/GA1 |
|
|
|action4oldid= |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|currentstatus=DGA |
|
==St. Patrick: Fact and Fiction== |
|
|
|
|topic=philrelig |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Press |
|
|
| author = Harrison, Stephen |
|
|
| title = The Misplaced Pages Page for St. Patrick Is Surprisingly Good: Here’s why |
|
|
| org = Slate |
|
|
| url = https://slate.com/technology/2018/03/why-the-wikipedia-page-for-st-patrick-is-so-good.html |
|
|
| date = 16 March 2018 |
|
|
| quote = As Adrianne LaFrance noted in the Atlantic, there is no self-evident unifying theory about why certain Misplaced Pages pages are higher quality than others. But with its combination of primary sources, motivated contributors, and shared vision, St. Patrick’s entry could be hinting at the magic formula. |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|living=no|listas=Patrick, Saint|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Christianity|importance=Top|catholicism=yes|catholicism-importance=Top|anglicanism=yes|anglicanism-importance=Mid|saints=yes|saints-importance=Top|eastern-orthodoxy=yes|eastern-orthodoxy-importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Ireland|importance=top|peer-review=|old-peer-review=}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Celts|importance=mid}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Top 25 Report|Mar 17 2013|Mar 16 2014|Mar 15 2015|Mar 13 2016|Mar 12 2017|Mar 14 2021}} |
|
|
{{afd-merged-from|Battle for the Body of Saint Patrick|Battle for the Body of Saint Patrick|19 November 2017}} |
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} |
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 70K |
|
|
|counter = 3 |
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|
|algo = old(31d) |
|
|
|archive = Talk:Saint Patrick/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{archive box|auto=yes}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Lutheran saint? == |
|
What are the sources for the following statments? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The text asserts that Patric is "venerated as a saint in the ... Lutheran church...". Lutheran churches do not recognize "saints" or venerate them, even though Lutheran church buildings may be named after disciples, evangelists or archangels venerated by Catholics as "saints". ] (]) 14:48, 24 January 2024 (UTC) |
|
*1 - ''"born Patricius Magonus Sucatus"'' |
|
|
*2 - ''" seems to have studied at the monastery of Lérins on the Côte d'Azur from 412 to 415 ...He spent the next 15 years at Auxerre were he became a disciple of Saint Germanus of Auxerre and was ordained possibly about 417."'' |
|
|
*3 - ''"Saint Germanus consecrated Patrick bishop about 431, and sent him to Ireland to succeed Saint Palladius, the first bishop, who had died earlier that year. "'' |
|
|
*4 - ''"There was some contact with the pope. Patrick visited Rome in 442 and 444. "'' |
|
|
*5 - ''"Popular devotion to Patrick began in France, long before Sucat received the noble title of Patricius"'' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Quality of Content == |
|
These and other statments seriously mar what is otherwise a fairly good and reasonably well written article. Also the chronology implicit in them is all over the place. The fact of the matter is that no one know for sure what the dates of Patrick's life are; those of 461 (arriving in Ireland) and 491 (death) are estimates arrived at only after decades of discussion. Will whoever rewrote this article please show the basis for including these statments. Thank you. ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a truly dreadful article, mostly obsessed with Catholic trivia about shamrocks, bells, and visions. Patrick was actually a most important person in establishing and propagating literacy - a fundamental tool for propagating religious philosophy. Catholicism, for example. By ignoring the literacy part of Patrick's existence, this article becomes an astonishing and execrable waste of time! Is nobody here aware of this other side of Patrick's life, not to mention being able to include some relevant history? ] (]) 01:32, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|
I've re-revised the article ''again'' in line with what I wrote above, for the simple reason that ] reverted back to his version ''again'' without citing sources for statments I take issue with. I dislike doing this unilaterally because it is against the spirit of wikipedia, but it seems I have to draw attention to this in some manner other than being polite. ], 18:52 pm, 18th April 2005. |
|
|
|
:We don't really know any of this. You seem to want to replace one style of hagiographical myth-making with another. ] (]) 15:44, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::I'm again astonished that a would-be Patrick scholar would be so completely in the dark about Patrick's work as to suggest that it's simply more "hagiographical myth-making"! Here is just '''one''' example of an academic analysis of Patrick's substantial, even monumental, works from 807 A.D.: https://www.confessio.ie/manuscripts/dublin#1 <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 00:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
:::I'm well aware of the ''Confessio'', but I don't think Patrick actually mentions teaching reading, let alone writing, anywhere in it, though he may well have done some of that. ] (]) 02:23, 18 March 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:I wholehearedly concur. There is a load of deliberate obfuscation here. What is the point of quoting an idiot from 130 years ago who was so arrogant as to assert that Patrick could not spell at all. You quote him as referring to "Bonaven Taburnia" when it is, of course, ''Bannavem Taburniae''. Yes... this does refer to the Roman Fort Banna on Hadrian's Wall (now usually called Birdoswald). |
|
|
:The Bannaventa near Coventry is matched by another, now Banwen, in Wales and means "pig market". On the other hand Bannavem Taburniae means "The Boars' Inns" because when the legionaries left it became a hunting lodge complex. ] (]) 15:41, 26 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Myth? == |
|
* I did? Where? I just checked through my edits and all I can find is reverts of blatant vandalism and one weird edit (documented below). I also reverted "confession" -> "confessio" in the last two weeks or so - is this what you are referring to? - ]<sup><font color="DarkRed">]</font></sup> 18:11, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So, is St. Patrick a myth? ] (]) 14:24, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
*Hello Pete, glad to hear from you. The basic issues I have with the article as you wrote it - forgive me if I have mistaken you for another editor - are outlined above. I have no problem whatsoever with them being included in an article concerning Pat, so long as they are placed under some heading along the lines of "Speculations about St. Patrick". Because we know so very little about Patrick I really feel it is vital to seperate facts, speculation and hagiography. And - I mean no offense - much of what I have outlined above falls under the latter two categorys. Thank you for your time. ], 22:08, 15th April 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Err..... no, but the Catholic Church did so mess with eg his dates (for their own political reasons) as to make their story as worthless as a myth. There was a real person born c420 at Gretna who died in 493. ] (]) 15:44, 26 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
*: OOokay. You have me confused with someone else, I suspect. I've no comments really re. the points of contention above, as I didn't add them. - ]<sup><font color="DarkRed">]</font></sup> 22:21, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 24 December 2024 == |
|
* Okay, cheers. Sorry for that! ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Saint Patrick|answered=yes}} |
|
Most theories place St.Patrick's birthplace in Wales. - Peter |
|
|
|
Add a hyperlink to 'Ireland' in the patronage that leads to the Ireland Misplaced Pages page. ] (]) 21:25, 24 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:{{not done}}:<!-- Template:ESp --> already linked under died and should not be relinked as per ] ] (]) 13:54, 27 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
:(The above anonymously contributed without reading even the Misplaced Pages article. No consensus will ever be reached on precisely where in Romanized Britain the location ''vico banavem taburniae'' was sited. Wales is among the possibilities. --] 02:55, 22 December 2005 (UTC)) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Not NPOV == |
|
|
|
|
|
This article presents a great deal of speculative and controversial information as plain fact. For example, I don't believe it's remotely possible to say authoritatively that "His father was Calpornius, a deacon, son of Potitus, who was Romano-British". |
|
|
:The ''Confessio'', listed in the External links, begins "I, Patrick, a sinner, a most simple countryman, the least of all the faithful and most contemptible to many, had for father the deacon Calpurnius, son of the late Potitus, a priest, of the settlement of Bannavem Taburniae..." I'll check to make a footnote in the entry. --] 11:17, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm... the article currently starts with |
|
|
|
|
|
:''Saint Patrick (circa '''373''' - March 17, 461) is the patron saint of Ireland. He was born around '''385''' in Caledonia, probably at Kilpatrick.'' |
|
|
(emphasis added) |
|
|
|
|
|
The last two external links give 387 to 390 as the date of birth... which of these three is correct? (I don't think "circa 373" and "around 385" are the same thing.) ] 14:07, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
387 to 390 sounds like circa 385 to me, so lets pick that. -- ] |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Dalriada |
|
|
According to my sources, the Irish kingdom in Co. Antrim was called Dal Riada. Irish seafarers (called Scotti) carried colonizers from that county to establish the kingdom of Dalriada in Argyll in northern Britain, in what would later become Scotland. -- Larry Gross |
|
|
|
|
|
Big disparity with the birth dates - why is it now "circa 420s"? -- ] |
|
|
|
|
|
==Baptist vs. Catholic POV stuff== |
|
|
|
|
|
Whatever did 192.31.106.34 do to the page tonight? Deleted legit links and added a major Baptist spin on a reasonably NPOV article? What's up with *that*?? Discussion of trans-vs-con- substantiation don't really belong in a biog. such as this. It reads like a Baptist sermon (which I'm familiar with). Recommend reversion. I've already rv'd the deleted links - that's just vandalism! ] 22:38, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Furthermore, large chunks were C&P'd from; http://www.calvaryroadbaptist.org/Article%20-%20St.%20Patrick%20A%20Baptist.htm and various other sites. ] 22:50, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I reverted it as it was basically a POV rant about how Patrick was a Baptist and all the Catholics are wrong, nyaah nyaah. Biased, preachy, irrelevant. I'm neither Catholic nor Baptist, BTW ] 14:49, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I thought Baptists were a Protestant group that originated many centuries later. What's going on? ] 03:55, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
They argue that in fact they predate Martin Luther and Protestantism and were an underground church.] 10:48, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
There is currently a reference to 'Catholic Celtic church', this is extremely POV. The current Catholic church may consider Patrick a Catholic but that doesn't explain why the Pope gave the go-ahead to the Normans to invade Ireland and 'Catholicise' Ireland. The Monks of Iona refused to recognise the Catholic church as being the same as the Celtic church. Even in England the Synod of Whitby came about because the Roman church did not like the Celtic one. |
|
|
|
|
|
As discussed above many other churches consider the Celtic church to be ancestral to their own e.g. the Anglicans / Espiscopolians (since the church was native to Britain and Ireland and not part of the see of Rome). The Celtic cross is used by the Church of England as a symbol and native Saints e.g. Aidan are seen as Anglican saints. |
|
|
|
|
|
I think endorsement of one point of view is a bad idea and this article needs a section to discuss the different claims about St Patrick. He is somebody who is popular in Ireland with Protestants as well as Catholics.] 15:20, 15 March 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== NPOV == |
|
|
|
|
|
Could someone please clean this article up? Specifically: one way or the other, could someone with sources and citations please clear up whether or not St. Patrick killed pagans.(Anon.) |
|
|
:"NPOV", so abused at Misplaced Pages, actually means "Neutral point-of-view." --] 15:47, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I too would *really* like to see this cleared up. I have read that St. Patrick was responsible for the death of many pagans, and even accounts accusing him and his followers of burning pagan books and shrines. However, I do not recall any of the sources as being particularly authoritative. Given, searching online doesn't turn up a whole lot along these lines either, but that is the nature of search - so many people like St. Patrick that of course all the high ranking links will be positive. Thoughts? |
|
|
|
|
|
== categories == |
|
|
|
|
|
* would that qualify for 2 "death year" categories? I don't know wikipedia's position on unreliable death dates. (] 20:54, 1 May 2005 (UTC)) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Patron saints of Ireland == |
|
|
|
|
|
If there is no opposition, I would like to add that saint Patrick is the patron saint of Ireland, ''along with ] and ]'', as it is given as fact in ]. ] 19:47, 13 August 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== External links == |
|
|
|
|
|
I removed the following as essentially duplicating content in other links. ] says where links should be used, it sems to me as if there are rather too many all saying much the same thing. |
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
* |
|
|
* |
|
|
* |
|
|
* |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
] <sup>]]</sup>/<sub>]]</sub> '']'' 00:04, 31 December 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Age? == |
|
|
|
|
|
Browsing this topic quickly I noticed the date of birth and date of death given at the top, which puts St. Patrick at an age of 106 upon his death. This isn't commented on anywhere in the body of the article, which seems a bit strange for such a remarkable age. |
|
|
|
|
|
Citations for birth and death dates would be nice given their relative unbelievability. Catholic.org gives his birth as 387 and his death as 461, dates I am much more inclined to believe. |
|
|
|
|
|
== Great Britain == |
|
|
|
|
|
I have a thing with editing out the term ']', except when referred to for etymological or terminological reasons. Call it a compulsion, a pain in the neck, or whatever, there's a very good reason for it, and I always make sure that every time I edit away ''that word'', I am doing something constructive, no matter how minor. Whereas ']' clearly refers to an island, the meaning of which is unambiguous, 'Britain' is shorthand for the island (Great Britain), the archipelago to which it belongs (British Isles), or the country to which it belongs (United Kingdom). Thus, 'Britain' is either sloppy, misleading, or both sloppy and misleading. ] 23:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:There was no country of Great Britain in the time of Saint Patrick. In this context it would be referring to the Roman province considered ''Britain'', therefore ''Britain'' is the correct wording here. ] 23:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::There's no country of Great Britain now, either; Great Britain is an island. Furthermore, the Roman province was called 'Britannia', not 'Britain'. If you mean the Roman province, write ']', not 'Britain'; 'Britain' doesn't actually mean too much by itself (hence the content of the article on ]), so its use should be avoided if one is to ensure encyclopaedic accuracy and precision. ] 00:29, 4 May 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::No need to be disingenuous. The Roman province is accepted as both ''Britain'' and ''Britannia''. In this case, either one would work, whereas ''Great Britain'' would be wildly inaccurate. ] 07:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Please, Irish Guy, read ]; it is an island, not a country. --] 08:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC) |
|
The text asserts that Patric is "venerated as a saint in the ... Lutheran church...". Lutheran churches do not recognize "saints" or venerate them, even though Lutheran church buildings may be named after disciples, evangelists or archangels venerated by Catholics as "saints". Jarmo K. (talk) 14:48, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
This is a truly dreadful article, mostly obsessed with Catholic trivia about shamrocks, bells, and visions. Patrick was actually a most important person in establishing and propagating literacy - a fundamental tool for propagating religious philosophy. Catholicism, for example. By ignoring the literacy part of Patrick's existence, this article becomes an astonishing and execrable waste of time! Is nobody here aware of this other side of Patrick's life, not to mention being able to include some relevant history? Henrilebec (talk) 01:32, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Not done: already linked under died and should not be relinked as per MOS:REPEATLINK Ultraodan (talk) 13:54, 27 December 2024 (UTC)