Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:05, 3 July 2013

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Catholicism Low‑importance David Bawden is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Catholicism task list: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : see Draft articles Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page) Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment Photo : see Category:Misplaced Pages requested photographs of Catholicism Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

Template:Findnotice

H.H. Pope Michael was ordained and consecrated by a bishop with valid orders from the Duarte Costa lineage, and so the quote attributed by "John L. Allen Jr." is fatheaded and nonsensical, besides being incompetent as Allen is no authority at all.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.249.115.244 (talk) 08:20, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

It would be great if you could give His apostolic lineage, or a link, and the date of His consecration. Perhaps Mr Allen wrote before H.H. was ordained. The Brazilian Catholic Apostolic Church does not recognize most ordinations of the Duarte Costa lineage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardson mcphillips (talk • contribs) 21:29, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

The information was provided on the page before it was butchered into its present caricature first by a miscreant than by Wikipedians who have locked this page. H.H. Pope Michael was ordained and consecrated by Robert Biarnessen who was consecrated by John Parnell. Whether the "Brazilian Catholic Apostolic Church" recognizes or not the ordinations and consecrations of the Duarte Costa lineage is not relevant. 115.249.115.244 (talk) 12:54, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

'antipope'?

the article states that Mr Bawden is considered an antipope, but the definition of antipope at the (Misplaced Pages) link provided denies it: "An antipope ... is a person who makes a widely accepted claim to be the lawful pope, in opposition to the pope recognized by the Roman Catholic Church. In the past antipopes were typically those supported by a fairly significant faction of cardinals .... Persons who claim to be the pope but have few followers, such as the modern sedevacantist antipopes, are not generally counted as antipopes, and therefore are ignored for regnal numbering." I presume Mr Bawden does not consider himself to be an antipope. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 21:11, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

H.H. Pope Michael I is not an antipope anymore than Innocent II was one. 115.249.115.244 (talk) 12:54, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

In view of this, should David Bawden be listed as a 'modern sedevacantist antipope'? (ArnoldTrotter (talk) 07:08, 20 May 2012 (UTC))

Edit request on 15 June 2012

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Would like to update page as David Bawdens website now claims that he has been ordained and consecrated

Rkretowi (talk) 11:32, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

 Not done: requests for increases to the page protection level should be made at Misplaced Pages:Requests for page protection. Mdann52 (talk) 16:15, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Title change to "Pope Michael"

It has been proposed in this section that David Bawden be renamed and moved to Pope Michael. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move

David Bawden → Pope Michael – Please put your reason for moving here. Canon Law Junkie §§§ Talk 03:23, 3 July 2013 (UTC) should the title be "Pope Michael"? clearly this is his most popular name. i don't think many people know him as "David Bawden", and per Misplaced Pages:Article titles#Use commonly recognizable names. For example, on the page it says to use "Lady Gaga" and not "Stefani Germanotta". it seems to be the same situation here. David Bawden is notable because he claims to be pope with the name Michael. i think the article title should reflect the most common name, which is certainly not David Bawden. Canon Law Junkie §§§ Talk 09:06, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Difficult question. The comparison with Lady Gaga is not exact, because "Lady Gaga", "Mark Twain", "Elton John", "Marilyn Monroe", etc. are stage names. Nobody could say to Elton John, "You're not really Elton John!", because he is. On the other hand, the title "Pope Michael" (as you say) is a title that by its very nature includes a claim to an office that is not recognized by 99.999+% of the planet.

It would be different if he took the title "Pope" to signify that he was the leader of a church of twenty people, but he claims to be the rightful pope of a billion Catholics.

On the other hand, Misplaced Pages does list Joshua Abraham Norton, self-proclaimed "Emperor of the United States", under the title Emperor Norton. That's a very close analogy. And many, many people recognize the name "Emperor Norton", even if they can only identify it as referring to "that crazy guy from San Francisco".

So I would support a move of this page to Pope Michael if you can substantiate your claim that more people (or, if you prefer, more Americans, or if you prefer, more reliable non-Wiki sources) recognize the name "Pope Michael" than those who recognize the name "David Bawden". I myself am familiar with both names, but as you pointed out, we need to follow the WP:COMMONNAME policy, which says we should "use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources". — Lawrence King 15:48, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

The hour-long documentary produced by independent filmmakers uses the term "Pope Michael". This story by Sarah Henning also uses the term "Pope Michael" as its main term, although it does mention "David Bawden". What appears to be his personal facebook does use the name "David Bawden", but that's a primary source anyway. This website refers to him as "David Bawden, better known as Pope Michael I", but I'm not sure it's a reliable source. Most of the media coverage that came up on Google mentioned both names, but used "Pope Michael" as the primary story name. I could not find any reliable sources which used the term "David Bawden", and I have not found any conclusive data that says that more people/sources use "Pope Michael", but it does seem to be the case. Canon Law Junkie §§§ Talk 18:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Seems persuasive to me. If you like, we could wait a day or two to see if anyone else chimes in, but this does seem to justify an article that begins with the words Pope Michael.

There are, of course, two more questions to answer. First, should the page title refer to Pope Michael or Pope Michael I? Folks have debated this question in other settings, but my impression is that the common Western convention is to omit "I" until there's a "II". In the East, this rule might not apply. In the West, John Paul I was the only pope to use the number "I" during his own lifetime.

The second question is this: Currently, both Pope Michael and Pope Michael I are disambiguation pages, since there have been several Coptic Pope Michaels. If we were to actually give David Bawden the unadorned Pope Michael page, we would have to create a Pope Michael (disambiguation) page as well. However, in my opinion, Bawden's fame, although real, is primarily based on the fact that most Americans find him funny (as in your Eye-of-the-Tiber link), and so I don't think it's realistic to claim he's more notable than an actual Coptic Pope who reigned for 24 years in the 8th century. So what would you say to keeping the Pope Michael article as a disambiguoation page, and moving Bawden to, say, Pope Michael (David Bawden) or Pope Michael I (David Bawden) or Pope Michael (conclavist) or something like that? — Lawrence King 20:22, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

1. Good! But I do think we should wait a day, in the name of "consensus", for any last comments.

2. I think that the title should be "Pope Michael", not "Pope Michael I", since he is more commonly referred to as "Pope Michael" and the whole point of the namechange is to conform to the common name policy.

3. I agree that he is not, at least from a scholarly, religious, or historical point-of-view, more notable than the Coptic pope. However, as you mentioned, the Coptic pope reigned in the 700s, whereas the American conclavist is a contemporary figure. I think it's fair to say that he is more notable to the average person than the Coptic pope of the 700s (the Coptic gets about 7 pageviews per day, while the American gets about 60). Therefore, I actually do think that we should "bestow" the Pope Michael page upon David Bawden, and create a new Pope Michael (disambiguation) page. Canon Law Junkie §§§ Talk 21:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose per Misplaced Pages:Five pillars #1 & 2. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose. Pope is a very specific title that can not just be taken by anyone who wants to call themself pope. There have been others like this too, and there is no reason for an encyclopedia to pretend this. "elected by 6 people to be pope" "30 followers" Why do they even have an article? Apteva (talk) 05:13, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose: Unless I get my own article titled "Dalek Supreme Dominus Vobisdu, Emperor of the Known Universe etc., etc." Can you imagine what the Napoleon disambig page would look like if we mentioned every silly claimant? Nor does it belong on the Pope Michael disambig page, or mentioned in parentheses. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 05:39, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

• Biography articles of living people
• All unassessed articles
• Start-Class Catholicism articles
• Low-importance Catholicism articles
• WikiProject Catholicism articles
• Start-Class biography articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• Requested moves