Talk:Pope Clement XIV

Untitled

It's not easy to begin with a period piece like this. Wetman 22:13, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Death?

Where is the section of this article about Clement XIV's death? It is an important, albeit morbid, part of any person's biography, and it is totally missing from this page. Death circumstances should be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.62.249.129 (talk) 04:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

This page needs to conform to a higher standard of impartiality.

I mean, honestly, this page is so partisan in praise of this pope that it reads like an argument in support of his actions, rather than a fact-based article.

I'm not taking a side, nor am I familiar with the controversy. I take issue with the fact that the author takes a side, in what should be an objective work that avoids bias.

I lack the historical knowledge to fix the article myself, but I really hope that someone does so.

Here are examples of what I take issue with:

"There cannot be any reasonable doubt of the integrity of his conduct, and the only question is whether he acted from a conviction of the pernicious character of the Society of Jesus or merely from a sense of expediency. In either case his action was abundantly justified, and to allege that though beneficial to the world it was detrimental to the church is merely to insist that the interests of the Papacy are not the interests of mankind."

And

"No Pope has better merited the title of a virtuous man, or has given a more perfect example of integrity, unselfishness, and aversion to nepotism."

Both of the above have been pasted from the article as it appears on 03-Jan-2004.

This is not the type of thing expected in an encyclopedia article. People come to Wikipedia to learn the facts, not to read an opinion piece.

I request that anyone qualified to edit the article to conform to the expected standards of Wikipedia would do so ASAP.

The thing is taken from the Catholic Encyclopedia. A lot of pope articles really ought to be gone over and entirely rewritten, I suspect. john k 03:33, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

From T. Anthony-Most of the Anti-Jesuit stuff wouldn't have came from the Catholic Encyclopedia, but I see that was taken down.

FromShanechan- First of all, as you can read, this is thougt by the catholics. I think this piece of the encyclopedia has to be mentioned, because it gives a clear vision about the believes about Clemens XIV. And isn't the pope the leader of the Catholics, so isn't it of importance what the catholics think about this pope?

This page should be rewritten, which I may well do.-Danny 31 December 2005

The pope is a leadership figure, of course the article of any pope will have bias. I challenge you to find 1 article of a famous political leader on Wikipedia which does not contain a bias. It's simply impossible. This article has sufficent impartiality and does not need to be greatly revised. -Nathan 17 December 2007

The major criticism of the article's POV is from 2005 and is without signature. It's a drive by that's been left up too long. I'm going to pull the NPOV tag as long outdated and artificial. TMLutas 17:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Tomb of Clemens XIV by Antonio Canova.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:24, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Tomb of Clemens XIV by Antonio Canova.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:05, 18 February 2023 (UTC)