Talk:Pope Pontian

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 21, 2014, July 21, 2018, July 21, 2019, and September 28, 2023.

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

Biography: Politics and Government 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 politics and government work group. Christianity: Saints / Catholicism Mid‑importance Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Saints (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism (assessed as Mid-importance). European Microstates: Vatican City Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Microstates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of European Microstates 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.European MicrostatesWikipedia:WikiProject European MicrostatesTemplate:WikiProject European MicrostatesEuropean Microstates articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Vatican City (assessed as Mid-importance).

Do we have a ref for his papacy beginning 21 July 230? My breviary says he didn't become pope until 231. Carl.bunderson (talk) 20:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. The Catholic Encyclopedia isn't acceptable as a reference for something this ancient -- word of mouth isn't going to cut it either. Jeff Carr (talk) 18:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia is, indeed, one of the most reliable sources for this sort of thing. However, you can also see Richard P. McBrien, Lives of the Popes (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 2000) in which McBrien mentions Pontian's death is actually the first precisely recorded date in papal history. It is found in the Liberian Catalogue. Hfeatherina (talk) 18:35, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mentioning in the English Wikipedia the name (in Latin) by which Pope Pontian was called in his time can be justified. But there is no logic in mentioning in the English Wikipedia what Pope Pontian is today called in Italian or, for that matter, in Esperanto. Neither of these languages existed at the time of Pope Pontian, and he never heard himself called by those names. Would anyone dream of adding to the English articles on Julius Caesar, Horace, Nero ... the information that in Italian they are called Giulio Cesare, Orazio, Nerone ...? The (re)insertion of the Italian name of Pope Pontian must be reverted. Esoglou (talk) 18:51, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Given the difference in popular knowledge between those names and his in English, that argument seems to be apples and oranges. Or, at the least, cucumbers and pickles. The entries on other individuals who are known historically under the Latin form of this name show the Italian version. Daniel the Monk (talk) 03:16, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In your sentence "The entries on other individuals ...", what are you referring to by "this name"? Do you mean Pontian/Pontianus? The article on Pontianus Africae does not give the Italian version of his name. The only other article that I find in the English Wikipedia about a Pontianus is that on Pontianus of Spoleto. Mention in that article of the Italian version of this saint's name is justified and perhaps even necessary because of a section on the Basilica of San Ponziano. The reader of the article on Pope Pontian(us) has no such need of an explanation of "Ponziano".

In your sentence "Given the difference in popular knowledge ..." are you saying that ancient Romans not popularly known in English should have their names given in Italian? Are you seriously suggesting that, while there is no need to mention in the articles on well-known people like Julius Caesar and Horace what they are called in Italian, the articles in the English Wikipedia on Appius Claudius Caecus, Caecilius Statius, Gaius Lucilius, Laevius, Quintus Claudius Quadrigarius, Quintus Lutatius Catulus, Sempronius Asellius, Titus Quinctius Atta and Valerius Antias do need to be changed so as to include the Italian form of their names? Surely not. Esoglou (talk) 07:48, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to do all of them, but you haven't given a valid reason for not doing so in individual entries, should an editor feel it is warranted. Daniel the Monk (talk) 07:58, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if there is no need for the English Wikipedia to give the names by which (all of) these are known in Italian, what is the need/warrant for the English Wikipedia to give the name by which Pope Pontianus is known in Italian? Esoglou (talk) 08:06, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In my mind it was to allow readers to connect him with others of the same name, which is rendered differently in their entries. Daniel the Monk (talk) 08:34, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The name they all shared was Latin "Pontianus" (given in all three articles), not Italian "Ponziano", which of course is not given in the article on the African Pontianus. In no way does the Pope's name in Italian let readers connect him with the other Pontiani. The way to let readers know that the English Wikipedia has articles on two others of that name is by the template that I have now added in response to your wish. Esoglou (talk) 09:58, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]