Hoi again,
I suppose his sources are these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Willibald
Well... much in the same way the legend of the Theban Legion rose in Turin, mostly in the same period.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theban_legion
So much for medieval "biographers".
Berto 'd Sera Personagi dl'ann 2006 per l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojaotri) http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
-----Original Message----- From: wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Andre Engels Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2007 10:36 PM To: wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Sensitive subjects on some Wikipedias
2007/7/15, Berto 'd Sera albertoserra@ukr.net:
"extending and correcting history" sounds a bit arbitrary, to say the
least.
I have LOTS of things that I would rewrite in mainstream history, and even evidence for at least some of them, yet... this would be a new history
book,
not an encyclopedia.
Honestly, I don't understand how they can keep such a stance within the bounds of the NPOV policy, let alone original research. I understand documenting alternative views on a given issue, but ignoring a mainstream view altogether seems wrong to me.
Well, it's not a case of ignoring the mainstream view. However, the discussion is about whether we are to discuss the mainstream view (that Boniface was killed by robbers) and then the criticisms of it (that it might for example have been a planned action of Frisians resisting christening), or whether we are to spend at least as much space to this person's private ideas (that Bonifatius was executed because thirty years earlier he had torn down some holy oaks).