Talk:Thomas Cajetan

Catholicism Mid‑importance

Thomas Cajetan 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 articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism task list:

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:Wikipedia 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

Lutheranism Mid‑importance

	Thomas Cajetan is part of WikiProject Lutheranism, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Lutheranism on Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to Lutheran churches, Lutheran theology and worship, and biographies of notable Lutherans. 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.LutheranismWikipedia:WikiProject LutheranismTemplate:WikiProject LutheranismLutheranism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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 articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Philosophy: Philosophers Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophers

Title

I have no objection to the merger, except I would retain the title of this article, as it is his full name. --CTSWyneken 02:32, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NCWC says "In the titles of articles, cardinals generally go by their full name (both first name and surname) alone, without the title "Cardinal", as "Ascanio Sforza", not "Cardinal Ascanio Sforza", nor "Ascanio Cardinal Sforza". Exceptions are cardinals who are identifiable only by the cardinalitial title (as in the case of a hypothetical Cardinal John Smith), those best known by the title "Cardinal" followed by a surname (as Cardinal Richelieu), and those of the period before the introduction of surnames." A scan of Google Books indicates to me that Thomas Cardinal Cajetan" has been used less frequently than "Thomas Cajetan". Olessi (talk) 21:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

conflicting dates

The image says it is of Luther and Cardinal Cajetan in 1557, however both men were dead at this time. Does anyone know the true date? Adam crymble 01:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have to check it, but the date is likely correct. Unlike photographs. paintings can be done at anytime after the event, even if the subjects are dead. Then again, with Photoshop... 8-) --CTSWyneken^(talk) 10:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV?

his appearance in all the splendor of ecclesiastical pomp only serving to reveal him to Luther as the type of Roman curialist hateful to Germans and German Christianity.

This sounds a lot like taking sides with Cajetan, but I can't think of what to replace "reveal" with. -El Mariachi 21:13, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Curiously enough, I read it the other way. 8-) Seriously, if I remember correctly, the text is seeded from a 19th century encyclopedia or two. Feel free to pick up a few sources and correct the language. Does [encarta.msn.com Encarta] have anything? --CTSWyneken^(talk) 09:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are all kinds of Italian surnames, particularly of Southern origin, but not exclusively, that start with De, as in De Luca and De Lucia, De Vito, etc.

208.87.248.162 (talk) 12:29, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think if a source like Hillaire Belloc is cited uncritically, as currently it is re: Cajetan vs Luther, this article definitely has a neutrality problem. Per$1$tenceofv1$1on (talk) 13:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Per$1$tenceofv1$1on[reply]

De Vio

Why is he referred to as de Vio? If he is Italian, shouldn't it be di Vio? De is French and Spanish. Emperor001 16:31, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling is more standardized today. There were many Italian dialects then (and there are still many, but spelling is more standardized today). See the Italian Wikipedia page it:Tommaso De Vio for verification. — Lawrence King ^(talk) 00:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 04:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]