Talk:Pope Nicholas V

Birth Date

Why is birth date given as 11-13-1397? Other sources give it as 11-15-1397 http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11058a.htm https://www.britannica.com/biography/Nicholas-V-pope Thisdaytrivia (talk) 06:00, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pope Nicholas V. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110728080300/http://www.synodne.org/article.php/20070507103958523/print to http://www.synodne.org/article.php/20070507103958523/print

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:15, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Pope Nicholas V as depicted in the Nuremberg Chronicle

I think it is worthy to note that the illustrators of the Nuremberg Chronicle did not avoid reusing a woodcut of a king or a pope for several different prints of kings or popes that they were not particularly familiar with. Therefore I think that the picture of Pope Nicholas V from the Chronicle used in the article is unhelpful. In fact, this picture was clearly produced with the same woodcut as that of Pope Stephen on page 120v of the Chronicle and of Pope John II on page 144v, just with a slight colour change. As this picture was clearly not intended to be a meaningful interpretation of what Pope Nicholas V looked like or how he was historically perceived, it is misleading to have it in the article.

Hi. Two things. First, no one is contending that this is actually how Pope Nicholas looked. Secondly, despite woodcuts being reused, we at Wikipedia use the Nuremberg Chronicle as illustrations on other pages. It is perfectly fine to have this depiction here. I hope you understand. Thank you SleeplessNight12 (talk) 06:22, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Per "no one is contending that this is actually how Pope Nicholas looked", I don't think that's correct, the basic assumption is probably that illustrations like these has priorities besides how things actually looked. Also, the presence of illustrations from the Nuremberg Chronicle in other WP-articles neither supports or oppose such an illustration in this article, see WP:OSE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:19, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Sir, I am at loss here. Every depiction of every single pope before the middle ages were made centuries afterwordsSleeplessNight12 (talk) 16:57, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Plagiarism from 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica

Most of the material taken from source #6, the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica, appears to be text pasted verbatim from the source or with one word changed. As many a student can attest, this constitutes plagiarism even though the source has been cited. I am not deleting because the content is relevant and informative. Suggest somebody review and revise as appropriate. 216.195.25.146 (talk) 08:25, 6 March 2025 (UTC)