Talk:Persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

More copyright violations

This paragraph One of the most notable instances of persecution during the reign of Aurelius occurred in 177 at Lugdunum (present-day Lyons, France), where the Sanctuary of the Three Gauls had been established by Augustus in the late 1st century BC. The persecution in Lyons started as an unofficial movement to ostracize Christians from public spaces such as the market and the baths, but eventually resulted in official action. Christians were arrested, tried in the forum, and subsequently imprisoned. They were condemned to various punishments: being fed to the beasts, torture, and the poor living conditions of imprisonment. is copied word for word. WikiBlame says this one was added by Cynwolfe on June 1 2012 [1]. Please remove and replace.

Jenhawk777, it would be utterly unlike such an honest and conscientious editor as Cynwolfe to commit a violation of copyright. I checked on the net and found a guttenberg self-publishing site that contained nothing but copies of Wikipedia articles and claimed to own the copyright - illegally, of course. Very few sites (including blogs) whose authors copy from Wikipedia honestly credit their sources. Can you please give a link to the site from which this was supposedly copied? Thanks Haploidavey (talk) 15:12, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Haploidavey I have had 7 - yes 7 - different backwards copy violations on articles I have written. One was in a published journal article! I wrote the journal, and they never did a thing about it! It is good to hear a statement of faith in your fellow editor, that makes me glad, so I am sure you are right. I just ran the copyvio detector again and it looks like two of them are now gone, but a second one is reporting what are mostly attributed quotes as violations. Here: [2] everyone should have the ability to run this valuable tool for themselves. I ran it then went through WikiBlame under view history to find out who wrote it. If there is a mistake, I apologize. Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:23, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Haploidavey I am now wondering if all of these aren't backwards copy violations. If you look up the Talkpage here, I apparently checked once before and found no violations, so how else would these appear suddenly unless someone else was copying us? The detector can't tell who copied who, it can only tell that material is duplicated. We need to run that down.Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:35, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A bunch of this article is duplicated at [3] which was written in 2021, long after us, and while it has sources I can't access them, so I can't tell if they attribute us or attribute the sources we attribute. I think the latter. I think we can assume a backwards violation based purely on the date. This one [4] is simply a translation of Tacitus. Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:45, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I can't adequately express how relieved I am; and that's partly because some of the writing in these (ahem) mooted copyright offences is actually rather fine. Cyn and I worked together on various articles for years, and I found her challenging, rewarding and very skillful indeed - a very fine writer, intellectually streets ahead and also an accomplished Latinist. Anyhow, the only possible evidence for copyright infringement, additional to text, is a date; the older date is the source, always; and its author(s) hold copyright. The site I mentioned above, the one sponsored bby the guttenberg.org, has no dates that I could find, and no claims of affiliation or scholarly credentials or names of authors, only a claim of copyright. The other clue is inline citation numbers. If text online has numbered citations check whether there are citations where they should be (per Wikipedia's version). Chances are that there will be none. I'm not talking about genuine mirror sites, by the way; they usually copy everything, right down to wiki-syntax and spelling errors. Haploidavey (talk) 17:49, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree on the matter of previous checks disclosing no problems. Thus also for this batch. By the way, I've come across the odd bit of piracy, with my own text as victim, on a few occasions. The most blatant was a TV programm on Rome, which employed various junior university talking heads. One of them spouted out stuff from the Venus article; I'd written it not 3 weeks prior. Flattering, I guess, but.. Haploidavey (talk) 17:59, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ha ha! Flattering indeed, but the sort that makes you squirm instead of smile! Someday I hope you and I will have worked together enough you will be able to say something even half as nice about me! It is sad she is no longer here, but good she has a friend watching over her work. I have posted one backwards tag and let the other ride since it is just Tacitus. I hope that works! Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:08, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And just guess who we have an article about. Why, it's a swallower of articles! It's Course Hero Haploidavey (talk) 18:26, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Holy Toledo Batman Haploidavey!! Should we go add something?! We have no source! Aaarrggh!! Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:35, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Let's just add this :-) Haploidavey (talk) 18:41, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What?! This conversation - or a smiley? Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:51, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You must mean let's add a copy of this talk to the talk page there right? Duh. I'm a little slow in the pickup today! Definitely! I agree! Will you take care of that? Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:54, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You're giving my imagination far too much credit; just a smiley, sorry to say. Yours is the better idea. Haploidavey (talk) 19:14, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is also a copy as it sits: By the end of the second century, the Christian apologist Tertullian complained about the widespread perception that Christians were the source of all disasters brought against the human race by the gods. They think the Christians the cause of every public disaster, of every affliction with which the people are visited. If the Tiber rises as high as the city walls, if the Nile does not send its waters up over the fields, if the heavens give no rain, if there is an earthquake, if there is famine or pestilence, straightway the cry is, "Away with the Christians to the lions!" but half of it's a quote that can be found in numerous legitimate sources. What's interesting is that BCRW-Baumgartner inserted this back in 2012 as part of a large quote which someone else whittled down - and removed the quotations from - making it a violation. The first part can be paraphrased, the last is a quote found in multiple sources. Please repair.

Wait! That's mine!! I have now restored the quotation marks and the attribution. Whew! Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:31, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The opening sentences of the lead are apparently also copied from a blog: The persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire occurred throughout most of the Roman Empire's history, beginning in the 1st century AD. Originally a polytheistic empire in the traditions of Roman paganism and the Hellenistic religion, as Christianity spread through the empire, it came into ideological conflict with the Imperial cult of ancient Rome.. It should also be easy to find a legitimate source for - that can be paraphrased or legitimately quoted. GPinkerton the detector says you added that one on 31 October 2020 [5]. It's not an inaccurate statement but we can't have a copyvio for our very first sentence! Please remove and replace with a paraphrased version that is sourced.

Please help everyone! Jenhawk777 (talk) 21:26, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:09, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Parts of "Neronian persecution" are misrepresenting the actual quoted sources

Brent D. Shaw, The Myth of the Neronian Persecution, is cited when calling the setion in Annals authentic, when in reality he wrote "There is no objective contemporary evidence that would definitely indicate an attack on Christians by Nero, either in connection with the Great Fire or otherwise.". Richard Carrier is cited to lead the reader to believe that he also affirms the authenticity, when actually Carrier says " It is here argued that their arguments can be met with no strong rebuttal, and therefore the key sentence in Tacitus referring to Christ should be considered suspect."

This is extremly suspect and poor standard for wikipedia.Atanar (talk) 18:56, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Atanar Where is that? The only reference to him that I see is under Neronian persecution saying: Brent D. Shaw has argued against the historicity of the Tacitean account of the Neronian persecution of Christians. Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:08, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Jenhawk777: I have corrected the error and eliminated references to Carrier (he is WP:FRINGE). Brent Shaw does not argue against the authenticity of the text, but states that Tacitus is historically unreliable. This argument has not won acceptance among scholars, AFAIK.--Karma1998 (talk) 21:49, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Karma1998 Well done. Thank you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:20, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Taking the pulse

So where are we now with this article. Is it in good shape? Are there unresolved issues? Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:11, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the section Persecution from AD 49 to 250, there are references to Ed RICHARDSON: "Ed Richardson explains..." The book cited lists 2 editors, Karl P. Donfried & Peter Richardson. SedesGobhani (talk) 15:04, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did Marcus Aurelius persecute Christianity?

An excellent scholarly article on this question: https://donaldrobertson.name/2017/01/13/did-marcus-aurelius-persecute-the-christians/ 2403:580B:879A:0:F9A7:79E3:4A56:E747 (talk) 18:55, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Roman_Empire"