Talk:Vincent de Paul

Incorrupt body

I have updated the entry with information about St. Vincent's relics from Joan Carrol Cruz's book The Incorruptibles (1977), pp. 248-249.76.123.208.229 (talk) 15:11, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

THIS ARTICLE IS WAY TOO LONG I CANNOT POSSIBLY READ THIS

I know it's easy to call me a idiot, but this is too long. I wouldn't even be surprised if people are just repeating stuff because no one would read something that big about some saint anyway. Is anyone man enough to tackle this long article? [unsigned comment by 200.207.181.88, 05:19, 21Aug2010]

It isn't necessarily the length it's just that it needs to be split into sections and clearer paragraphs

Jbhf1 (talk) 11:57, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

This guy is totally right. Wtf why is it so long? No other articles are this long O.o TheKnight27 (talk) 13:10, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

I'd call you an idiot for your blatantly sexist comment. "Man enough??" Since when did men enjoy a monopoly on editing ability? Get into the 21st century, pal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.252.183.253 (talk) 22:26, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Copyvio

I have removed the Biography section as it is essentially a copy of http://www.shc.edu.ph/saintvincent.htm , which is both a copyright violation and plagiarism. It was added by 85.232.204.170 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) on December 5, 2009. Editors are welcome to rewrite it using reliable sources. Some Wiki Editor (talk) 16:51, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Your shc.edu is now a dead link. I hope any plaigerism has been corrected, but I don't know how to check it. This page doesn't seem to get a lot of traffic, so maybe not. I'd be happy to help rewrite, but I won't take the time unless I see blatant grammar, spelling, etc. problems.

File:Vincent de Paul.PNG Nominated for speedy Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Vincent de Paul.PNG, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do?
	Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 04:32, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

It's been almost 7 years — the problem must have been resolved. From what I can see, public domain. rags (talk) 13:14, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Kidnapping contested --

I understand that some modern authorities -- I'm sorry, I can't remember their names -- feel that the story of Vincent's Islamic captivity is a more recent invention. Pittsburgh Poet (talk) 14:43, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Pittsburgh Poet's comment was correct. Please note this critical evaluation about this issue:

Joe Gatt (talk) 08:58, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

References

Silly sentence

"At an early age, he showed a talent for reading and writing.."

Since all people, unless mentally deficient, can read and write at some level this sentence is absurd. He may have showed a talent for learning above the norm or was bright or enjoyed learning. The sentence needs to be clarified. As it is, it's just stupid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.252.183.253 (talk) 22:24, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Not to quibble, but I know several people who have lived for decades and never learned to read. You may not remember, but someone worked with you to learn to form letters, and then words, first your name, and next to recognize same and decode sentences and paragraphs. In Vincent's day, the priesthood and nobles learned, but most of the common people, the vast majority, did not. The sentence does not state that he was a prodigy, only that he showed aptitude, which could very easily have gone to waste if his father had not chosen to make a rather large investment in this particular child. He SOLD HIS OXEN to pay for Vincent's education. In the 16th century universal free public education was not yet even dreamed of. There is strong likelihood that Vincent was the only one of his siblings who learned to read and write to any extent. I think you should read a bit more history before pronouncing an idea "silly". rags (talk) 13:50, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

By the way, what you want to write is, "he may have shown," not "he may have SHOWED."

Date Anomaly

The section headed "Veneration" starts: "In 2000, the Superior General of the Congregation of the Mission requested that the holy process of Vincent's canonization be instituted. On 13 August 1729 he was declared blessed by Pope Benedict XIII. He was canonized nearly eight years later by Pope Clement XII on 16 June 1737." Should "2000" be 1700? --Weka511 (talk) 21:47, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Incorrect citation.

"His first master was a fisherman, but Vincent was unsuitable for this line of work due to sea-sickness and was soon sold. His next master was a spagyrical physician, alchemist and inventor. He became fascinated by his arts and was taught how to prepare and administer his master's spagyric remedies.[7]"

[7]: Pormann, Peter E.; Savage-Smith, Emilie (2007). Medieval Islamic Medicine. Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 978-0-7486-2066-1.

There is no mention of Vincent de Paul in this book. This section will need new citations. 138.28.168.176 (talk) 21:11, 7 February 2024 (UTC)