Talk:Victorinus of Pettau
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
Victorinus of Pettau is part of the WikiProject Saints, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Saints and other individuals commemorated in Christian liturgical calendars on Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to saints as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to saints. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. |
[edit] Article name
I have moved the article back to Victorinus of Pettau from Victorinus of Ptuj. Although "of Pettau" is not the most "correct" title (as he was Bishop of Poetovio), this individual is overwhelmingly known as "Victorinus of Pettau" in English sources. A Google comparison prefers "of Pettau" (427) to "of Ptuj" (27, all WP links or mirrors). A comparison of Google Books is more telling- "of Pettau" (310) compared to "of Ptuj" (1). Olessi 19:45, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
I have just created an entry Victorinus of Poetovio, which redirects to Victorinus of Pettau, but suggest strongly to invert the things, i.e. to put the article under the name Poetovio and redirect there from Pettau. The fact is, that only older litterature refers to Victorinus as from Pettau; this town is now called Ptuj, but the bishopric was ancient Poetovio. And this name is more than prevalent in all recent patristic litterature. Cf. Martine Dulaey's (she is French) excellent monograph and her recent bilingual edition; the same in Italian from Maria Veronese. I see no reason of using German name in English text for an ancient writer in Latin. --Lyonski 21:26, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
One more thing: The Catholic Ecncyclopedia is in the case of V. of P. unfortunately outdated and if we want to have WP on high standards, we should not stick to its inaccuracies, when more correct data is available. --Lyonski 21:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
