Boniface Atticus I edit
Does anyone have any information on Boniface Atticus I? I can't find anything online. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.48.16.43 (talk) 01:43, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Untitled edit
Shouldn't the article say "Conclavist popes" rather than "Conclavist Antipopes"? Does this depend on point of view or are these considered antipopes within conclavism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.243.105.199 (talk) 19:11, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
- I think there is a lot to be said in favour of this proposed change. Calling them antipopes could be said to dignify them excessively by putting them on a level with the historical antipopes, who "made a significantly accepted competing claim to be the Pope". Esoglou (talk) 19:47, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Pope Krav? edit
The information that Mirko Krav Fabris is the first conclavist antipope was added in 2008 without giving any source.
I have not found anything on this supposed antipope from Croatia apart from a reference from Chryssides (see below). The information on the standup.si website of "MIRKO FABRIS KRAV" does not match with someone who is born before 1978.
George Chryssides gives in his Historical Dictionary of New Religious Movements (2nd ed. from 2012) the name "Mirko Krav Fabis" (not "Fabris", but the book also has in the same entry "Joaquia Sánez y Arriga" which is a typo mistake for Joaquín Sáenz y Arriaga so maybe "Fabis" is also a typo) as the first Conclavist antipope. However, I am afraid it may be a case of WP:CITOGENESIS. The first edition of the book is from 2001, but I am unable to consult it, so I cannot know for sure whether we are facing a citogenesis incident or not [EDIT: and after consulting the first edition on the Internet Archive, I see there is no "Conclavism" or "Conclavist" entry where they should be (p. 96-7), and after a digital OCR search inside the book I see there is no mention of "conclav", "Krav", "Fabris" or "Fabis"].
The only way I found to potentially enter in contact with Chryssides is by using the e-mail adress given on this website (there is no way to contact Chryssides throught his personnal website); so far, I have not attempted to make contact. I will ask for advice from other Wikipedia users. Veverve (talk) 23:47, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Also, the book True or False Pope? Refuting Sedevacantism and Other Modern Errors published by the St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary of the SSPX (2015) uses without giving any source the information added in late 2014 on WP that Krav was a stand-up comedian and dead: "For example, Mirko Fabris (d. 2012), a stand-up comedian from Croatia, was elected by a 'Conclave' in 1978 and became 'Pope' Krav (his stage name)." (True or False Pope?, "Preface", p. 7). However, 1) as I stated earlier, the stand-up comedian does not appear to be the alleged Conclavist pope Krav, 2) the standup.si website page does not state Krav is dead or even pope, 3) the only information Chryssides gives on Krav is: "The first antipope to be elected by this means [sic] was Mirko Krav Fabis, in Zagreb, Croatia, in 1978." Veverve (talk) 15:28, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
- Update on the work done recently to insure whether it is citogenesis or not:
- Update on the work again:
- Another update:
"Sedevacantist Antipope" listed at Redirects for discussion edit
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Sedevacantist Antipope and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 7#Sedevacantist Antipope until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 00:46, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
"Sedevacantist antipope" listed at Redirects for discussion edit
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Sedevacantist antipope and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 7#Sedevacantist antipope until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 21:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
"Sedevacantist antipopes" listed at Redirects for discussion edit
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Sedevacantist antipopes and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 7#Sedevacantist antipopes until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 21:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
"Sedevacantist Antipopes" listed at Redirects for discussion edit
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Sedevacantist Antipopes and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 7#Sedevacantist Antipopes until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 21:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
"Gregory XIX" listed at Redirects for discussion edit
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Gregory XIX and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 7#Gregory XIX until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 21:51, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
"Pope Gregory XIX" listed at Redirects for discussion edit
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Pope Gregory XIX and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 7#Pope Gregory XIX until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 21:51, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Palmarian popes edit
Why doesn't the page mention the Palmarian popes who are perhaps the most prominent conclavists? Their difference to other conclavists is that they recognize Pope Paul VI too while other conclavists consider Pius XII or John XXIII the last "legitimate Popes" of Rome, but the Palmarian Church shares the same opposition to the 2nd Vatican Council. 2001:4BC9:A44:401F:AC4A:9653:195D:E222 (talk) 12:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- WP:OR, WP:RS and WP:V is why. Reliable source must state that those are Conclavists, otherwise it is OR. Veverve (talk) 12:39, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- From the page's introduction: "Conclavism is the practice [...] which consists in the convening of a conclave — a human institution — to elect rival popes ('antipopes') to the current pope of Rome". The Palmarian Church is electing their own rival popes (except for their first one) so it meets the definition of conclavism. Btw, you should update your user page because you obviously are active on WP. 2001:4BC9:A44:401F:AC4A:9653:195D:E222 (talk) 12:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Again, RSs which classify them as such are needed. Veverve (talk) 12:52, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- They’re not conclavists because the origin of their papacy was mysticalist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.70.45 (talk) 14:39, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- Again, RSs which classify them as such are needed. Veverve (talk) 12:52, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- From the page's introduction: "Conclavism is the practice [...] which consists in the convening of a conclave — a human institution — to elect rival popes ('antipopes') to the current pope of Rome". The Palmarian Church is electing their own rival popes (except for their first one) so it meets the definition of conclavism. Btw, you should update your user page because you obviously are active on WP. 2001:4BC9:A44:401F:AC4A:9653:195D:E222 (talk) 12:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)