Talk:Sapienza University of Rome
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Saint Ivo
Dear sirs,
The church of "Sant'Ivo alla Sapienza", shown in the photograph, nothing to do with the modern University of Rome La Sapienza. Actually, the church built in the 1642-1660 is located in the ancient site of the University of Rome, in Corso Rinascimento 40, close to Piazza Navona, whereas the present Sapienza complex since 1935, built by the great architect Marcello Piacentini during the fascist regime, is located near Castro Pretorio and the Policlinico Hospital.
For further information see (in italian):
Good work!
F.S. --Matita 13:48, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Another Controversy
History repeats herself: Pope Benedict XVI just cancelled his inaugural speech due to students' protests.[3] Is it worth including here? --M4gnum0n (talk) 09:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- It is already mentioned.89.236.214.174 (talk) 10:36, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Neutrality
- Mr Razinger quoted an Austrian philosopher without taking the position. This is for me, after reading it totally clear. So I think the students and professors defended their stupidness... or are there unable of understanding the meaning of quotations?
- 67 out of 4500 professors protested (1,5 %) and a lot of extreme fundamentalist lefty students... maybe 10 to 15 % and some people from outside the university...
- religious obscurantism is everything but neutral
- What does the press in Italy say about this? Many saw that as an direct attack on free speech (atheist and theists alike) and were shocked about that. regards --Cyrus Grisham (talk) 14:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- It isn't mentioned in the article.
- So add the numbers with relative source.
- You can reword it.
- OT.
- --M4gnum0n (talk) 14:18, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
I have reworded it. It still probably needs to go as I think its WP:Recentism and not really worthy of metion.
Opinions???
CaptinJohn (talk) 16:51, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- Well, Pope Bendeict did not at all justifying the arrest of Galileo! Here is the text in German: Was Joseph Ratzinger in Parma über Galilei sagte. Radio Vatican might have the text . regards Cyrus Grisham (talk) 20:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- I have made the reference to Galileo more neutral, and added a reference to the letter the scientists sent to the rector. Goochelaar (talk) 22:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Forgive my ignorancew, but what does extraneousness mean?
-
-
-
- Thanks CaptinJohn (talk) 09:12, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- Irrelevantness, would be my guess. Abdullais4u (talk) 09:16, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks CaptinJohn (talk) 09:12, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Looking at the source (3) and its sources I dont think that they were protesting him not being a relevent speaker. It seems like they were more protesting against the church disagreeing with science (faith vs reason). Also it seems to be a small minority of students and lecturers and they are organising "Anti Cleric" week. Should we include this as it shows motivation or just cut the lot as mostly irrelevent? —Preceding unsigned comment added by CaptinJohn (talk • contribs) 11:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- "Extraneousness" is the noun related to the adjective "extraneous", i.e. "irrelevant or unrelated to the subject being dealt with". I put it in, but English is not my first language. I meant that those that signed the letter to the rector that provoked the subsequent reactions saw the pope as alien/foreign to the secular tradition of the university. In the letter they talk, for instance, about the "incredibile violazione della tradizionale autonomia delle università", i.e., "the unbelievable violation of the traditional autonomy of the universities" and say that "I temi che sono stati oggetto degli studi del professor Ratzinger non dovrebbero comunque rientrare nell'ambito degli argomenti di una lezione, e tanto meno di una lectio magistralis tenuta in una università della Repubblica italiana", i.e., "The themes that were the object of the studies of prof. Ratzinger should not be within the scope of the subject of a lesson, and even more so of a 'lectio magistralis', given in an university of the Italian Republic".
Feel free to use this or rephrase that sentence (not that anybody needs my permission!). On the other hand, this being an article about a 700 year old university, which has seen far more harsh and important "controversies", I do not feel more that a couple of sentences are needed. Happy editing, Goochelaar (talk) 16:49, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- "Extraneousness" is the noun related to the adjective "extraneous", i.e. "irrelevant or unrelated to the subject being dealt with". I put it in, but English is not my first language. I meant that those that signed the letter to the rector that provoked the subsequent reactions saw the pope as alien/foreign to the secular tradition of the university. In the letter they talk, for instance, about the "incredibile violazione della tradizionale autonomia delle università", i.e., "the unbelievable violation of the traditional autonomy of the universities" and say that "I temi che sono stati oggetto degli studi del professor Ratzinger non dovrebbero comunque rientrare nell'ambito degli argomenti di una lezione, e tanto meno di una lectio magistralis tenuta in una università della Repubblica italiana", i.e., "The themes that were the object of the studies of prof. Ratzinger should not be within the scope of the subject of a lesson, and even more so of a 'lectio magistralis', given in an university of the Italian Republic".
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- One could substitute some other verb for "pointing out", say "claiming" or "arguing". But I am perfectly fine with the current version. Goochelaar (talk) 21:40, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Logo Sapienza 2006 - 3D.jpg
Image:Logo Sapienza 2006 - 3D.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 12:37, 8 March 2008 (UTC)