Talk:Boethius

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Boethius article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 730 days

This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Arts and Entertainment / Politics and Government / Science and Academia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by the science and academia work group. Catholicism High‑importance Boethius is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Catholicism task list: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles Christianity: Theology / Saints Top‑importance Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by theology work group (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Saints (assessed as Top-importance). Philosophy: Philosophers / Logic / Ancient / Medieval Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Philosophers Logic Ancient philosophy Medieval philosophy Latin Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Latin 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.LatinWikipedia:WikiProject LatinTemplate:WikiProject LatinLatin articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Classical Greece and Rome Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Middle Ages High‑importance High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Theology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Theology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Theology 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.TheologyWikipedia:WikiProject TheologyTemplate:WikiProject TheologyTheology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Music theory Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Music theory, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of music theory, theory terminology, music theorists, and musical analysis 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.Music theoryWikipedia:WikiProject Music theoryTemplate:WikiProject Music theoryMusic theory articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Religion Top‑importance Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on 3 December 2009. Further details are available here.

Hi all -- I noticed that an anonymous editor added Ignatius Reilly to the "Influenced" section in the infobox. Because Ignatius Reilly is a fictional character from the novel A Confederacy of Dunces, and not a real philosopher, I removed it. In that novel, however, Boethius is mentioned very frequently, being the favorite philosopher of Ignatius Reilly, the main character. I'm now thinking that since A Confederacy of Dunces is a Pulitzer-prize winning classic novel, the factoid of Boethius being prominent in the book could go in a new "In popular culture" section. What do you think? -- Cloud atlas (talk) 05:35, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and added the section. Please do help improve it. -- Cloud atlas (talk) 05:57, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Boethius is not a saint, either in the Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox churches.

The article says his name is listed in the Roman Martyrology - it is not. He is nowhere listed for October in the Martyrology.

The article also says that his name is listed in the calendar of saints of Eastern Orthodoxy -- again, it is not. The calendar lists two saints for Oct. 23rd: James, the 'Brother of the Lord', and Patriarch Ignatius of Constantinople. Boethius is nowhere mentioned.

This information can be confirmed at: https://www.goarch.org/chapel/calendar http://www.liturgialatina.org/martyrologium/20.htm

A British clergyman, "Fr. Andrew Philips" does, however, list Boethius as a saint in his own calendar of saints on the webpage for his own church which he himself established. http://www.orthodoxengland.org.uk/oe4/fr-andrew-phillips-biography/ That hardly justifies claiming as fact that Boethius has been honored as a saint, either in East or West . . . which he has not.

If you disagree -- fine. But, you need to produce more evidence than just one man's opinion on his website.

Even if Boethius is venerated as a saint, the claim in the edit history about switching the "box between biography and veneration due to relevance" is rather absurd--he is a towering philosophical-historical personage, and a footnote of a saint at the very most. The veneration section of the article can perhaps stay (it's short anyway), but I'll be reverting the headline/box issues to their earlier form. 24.62.202.17 (talk) 05:49, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Boethius is indeed a saint according to the 2004 (latest edition) Roman Martyrology:

6*. Papiae in Liguria, commemoratio sancti Severini Boetii, martyris, qui, scientia ac scriptis praeclarus, in carcere detentus tractatum scripsit de consolatione philosophiae et Deo usque ad mortem a Theodorico rege inflictam cum integritate servivit.

He is also mentioned as "Saint Severino Boezio" on the calendar based on the 2004 Roman Martyrology here: http://www.gcatholic.org/saints/data/martyrology2004-10c.htm#d23

Perhaps you used an older edition of Roman Martyrology, so make sure to check using the 2004 Roman Martyrology. 69.174.156.228 (talk) 11:49, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Boethius is actually an orthodox saint. Father Andrew Phillips never leaved the Eastern Orthodox Church to create his own church, he just leaved his parish in Russia to start a mission in England. He writes to a famous and very respected orthodox website linked directly to the Orthodox Church. Fr. Andrew Phillips isn't the only one to state such a thing, in orthochristian.com, the previously cited website, has an article named "The Holy Moon" which refers to Boethius as a saint. I will leave the links bellow which found my reply.

https://pravoslavie.ru/83844.html

https://orthochristian.com/122645.html

https://www.saintjohnsorthodoxchurch.com/clergy

https://www.saintjohnsorthodoxchurch.com/ Ortwriter (talk) 15:47, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The sources you've provided don't mean much when compared to Boethius' absence from the Greek, Antiochian, OCA, and Russian liturgical calendars. Individual priests do not decide who the saints of the Orthodox Church are. Boethius is not a saint in the Orthodox Church. 128.255.234.11 (talk) 21:16, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boethius is indeed a saint according to the 2004 (latest edition) Roman Martyrology:

6*. Papiae in Liguria, commemoratio sancti Severini Boetii, martyris, qui, scientia ac scriptis praeclarus, in carcere detentus tractatum scripsit de consolatione philosophiae et Deo usque ad mortem a Theodorico rege inflictam cum integritate servivit.

He is also mentioned as "Saint Severino Boezio" on the calendar based on the 2004 Roman Martyrology here: http://www.gcatholic.org/saints/data/martyrology2004-10c.htm#d23

It seems some people thought he was not a saint because they used old editions of Roman Martyrology, so make sure to check using the 2004 Roman Martyrology because that is the latest edition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.174.156.228 (talk) 14:00, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The image placement in the article is killing me. I cannot tell on my screen where to actually format the images, and when I do, they are in a completely different place. If someone could help me on this, it would be greatly appreciated. GuardianH (talk) 20:20, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

After some discussion with GuardianH on my talk page, I intend to standardise all the refs in the article. At the moment it's about evenly split between short form refs and full inline cites. I'll be converting all the full inline cite to short form refs, so that only one style of referencing is used. If you disagree with this, or have any questions, please just say. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 09:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As noone has objected I've started work on this. Any questions or suggestions please just say. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 21:17, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All the inline cites have been converted to {{sfn}}. I've split the sources section into books, journal articles, and weblinks, as it look easier to read that way. Also all the cites that weren't part of referencing have been moved to a new Further reading section.

There were a few references without page numbers, and a lot of the same work but translated by different people in different years. It will take someone with more subject knowledge than me to untangle it. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 15:17, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much to @ActivelyDisinterested for formatting the citations — that was one of the last remaining big hurdles to accomplish before the article can be more effectively organized. With that done, I can now see to tidying up and rewriting all the other major sections. GuardianH (talk) 02:34, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Glad I could help, if you need anything else just ask. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 16:09, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]