Talk:The Burning Times

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Religion Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
	This article falls within the scope of the Interfaith work group. If you are interested in Interfaith-related topics, please visit the project page to see how you can help. If you have any comments regarding the appropriateness or positioning of this template, please let us know at our talk page

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film. Article upgrading needed: You can help! WP:IA   Stub to Start-Class Upgrading Instructions for Films Note that instructions for articles on other types of film topics within the scope of WikiProject Films are currently under development. To contribute in upgrading this stub article to Start class, the following requirements must be met: Significant intro (list the title, alternate titles, year released, director, actors starring in the film, summary of headings, etc.) Film infobox ({{infobox film}}) Picture: Consult WikiProject Free Images for freely released images from a film shoot, opening, or other relevant free image. Non-free and unlicensed images are to be avoided if at all possible, but if used should include a detailed fair use rationale. (An image is not required for start class if unavailable.) Plot summary Include cast and crew information. At least two other developed sections of information (production, reception (including box office figures), awards and honors, themes, differences from novel or TV show, soundtrack, sequels, DVD release, etc.) Categories (by year, country, language, and genre(s))  Helpful links: WP:BETTER, WP:LEAD, WP:REF, WP:WAF Once this article has fulfilled these requirements, the film can be reassessed to Start class and this template will be removed automatically.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (nations and regions): Canadian cinema task force

This article needs an image (preferably free) related to the subject, such as a picture of the set or a film poster. A possibility for American films from before 1964 would be a screenshot from the trailer, as these are now in the public domain. Please make sure fair use is properly observed, or the image will be removed. See WP:Films MOS for image guidelines and assistance in uploading.

"Catholics have taken exception to statements of the film like "it took the Church two hundred years of terror and death to transform the image of paganism into devil worship, and folk culture into heresy" depicting the movie as propaganda intended to represent the Christian Church as "a wicked, patriarchal, misogynist institution".

This statement is from a Catholic viewpoint only and no alternate viewpoint is discussed.

Well, if it is their viewpoint it should be included here. What alternate viewpoints do you suggest? Much of stories about 'the burning times' in history are based on false information. I think that sadly enough this movie is a product of these false viewpoints by pagans and wiccans. ( see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burning_times#The_Burning_Times ) --Soyweiser 10:56, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

"People had previously relied on the charity provided by the monasteries; once these were dissolved in England, there were a lot more elderly beggars. People felt guilty for not helping them, so when the old women went away mumbling, they assumed that they had been bewitched when they got psychosomatic symptoms resulting from their feelings of guilt."

This is not factual information. It insinuates one psychologically-evaluated conclusion (and by whom?) for what should be a broad spectrum of factual reasons. It was not only "elderly beggars" that were persecuted but many young mothers and daughters.

[edit] Section-NPOV and WP:NOR

Howdy. I added the Original Resarch tag to the article. I am *not* opposed to including sourced statements regarding the opinions and historical references here, but they are not presented in an encyclopedic style and do not cite sources. I'd like to see the article better crafted, and have added citation requests to some sections, though the whole article needs a rewrite to conform to Wikipedia policies. I changed the section title from "The Facts" to something more appropriate here. It is not enough to just say "It's a fact!" to include information in Wikipedia. Statements must be sourced to reputable, verifiable sources to merit inclusion. I look forward to working constructively with other editors to make this happen. Thanks. --NightMonkey 22:49, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree: this is the article about the movie, whatever its merits. Instead it discusses witch-hunts in general; they should be discussed at their proper article, and only facts relevant to the discussion of the movie should be brought up here. dab (ᛏ) 19:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV-check template

I notice the article was tagged for possible POV in the past, based on a section that has been removed from the article. I just restored the template because I think the current description of the movie is biased. In essence, it is an essay on why the movie is inaccurate. I haven't seen it, but it sounds like it needs critiquing very badly. I am not asking for any of it to go. Even so, I think it needs more neutral information in the lead: who made it, how long it is, and a summary of the movie itself. Maybe some context. Maestlin 01:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

well, the criticism is taken from the external links. It isn't a violation of NPOV to portray a crappy movie as crappy. In fact, I suppose it would be pov to portray it as anything else. Lacking parameters like those you ask for do not call for {{NPOV}} but rather for {{expand}}. dab (ᛏ) 17:22, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is definitely a violation of NPOV to portray a movie as "crappy", regardless of how crappy you think it is. Pfalstad 21:37, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

no, it would be a violation of encyclopedic tone, which is why you won't catch me using the term in article space, obviously. We would require to point out why it is deficient in quality (vulgarly known as 'crappy'). dab (ᛏ) 12:08, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, it seems that you are determined to keep your POV in this article, reverting any attempt to make it more balanced. Well, I'm not going to fight you on it, at least not without help... Pfalstad 14:50, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

this isn't "my pov". I haven't even seen the film. If it is true (I didn't check, our source is the review) that the film talks of 9 million deaths, I am merely pointing out the obvious, that this is indefensible nonsense, about 100 times the number assumed by scholars (that is, people who have actually studied the question). dab (𒁳) 14:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Saying that it is indefensible nonsense does not make it so. You must supply references for your statements. BTW the entry is in error about one fact: the movie was a Canadian production.

yeah yeah, see witch trials for your references, 9 million deaths my backside. dab (𒁳) 20:28, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of "needs infobox" tag

This article has had its infobox tag removed by a cleanup using AWB. Any concerns please leave me a message at my talk page. RWardy 20:56, 11 September 2007 (UTC)