Talk:Pavao Žanić/Archive 1

Question
Was Pavao Žanić related to Milovan Žanić, a high ranking minister of the Government of the Independent State of Croatia?? Quis separabit? 17:02, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
 * There's no such connection between them, except the surname, as far as I know. --Governor Sheng (talk) 21:38, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Gaspari's quote
What seems to be the problem?

Kutleša and Zovkić: Žanić was supportive of the Medjugorje in the beginning

Gaspari: "In the initial phase, the Bishop of Mostar, Monsignor Pavao Zanic, was sympathetic to the young visionaries."

No contradiction.

Kutleša and Zovkić: Žanić still avoided to recognise the apparitiosn as authentic

Gaspari, quoting Žanić: "Are we dealing here with a personal vision or a supernatural occurrence? It is hard to say."

No contradiction.

The only issue here, Red Rose, is that you have an agenda, and your sentence doesn't look like you would like it to. --Governor Sheng (talk) 22:57, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

After initially inviting me to the talk page, and after I did so, you choose to make edit wars. This is not productive in any way. --Governor Sheng (talk) 23:29, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Slp1 I think we need your help to resolve these issues. It would be a benefit for Wikipedia, if Governor Sheng and I could work together. Governor Sheng. Perhaps it would be a good idea to resolve this issue before we edit together on the Our Lady of Medjugorje page. I have done hours of research for the Our Lady of Medjugorje page and the many other pages that relate to that page and I am sure you have too. I am now ready to add edits to the many pages that relate to OLM while we wait for Slp1 to finish the intensive work of structuring the OLM page. It would be ideal if we both assumed Good Faith in our edits and respect each others edits. Here is the full edit using Gaspari In the beginning Zanic was sympathetic to the young visionaries and on July 25, 1981, he made a statement to the press: "No one has forced them or influenced them in any manner. These are six normal children; they are not lying; they express themselves from the depth of their hearts. Are we dealing here with a personal vision or a supernatural occurrence? It is hard to say. However, it is certain that they are not lying." When the full quote is there, there is no need for you to insert anything into it. I think it would be ok to take out this sentence -" For no apparent reason, all of a sudden Zanic completely changed his mind and became the main critic and opponent of the Medjugorje apparitions." because it is already stated on this page.
 * Instead of accusing me regarding my reference, you could ask me about it. ex. I had previously called the Inside the Vatican office and asked if there was a way to view the 1996 journal online and they said no but you can purchase the magazine itself.
 * If you have a question about my edit, instead of first shortening it to one sentence or then reverting it, ask me about it.
 * Instead of asking for a discussion you shrank my edit down to one sentence saying it was too long and then continued to edit, change the whole paragraph adding many sentences and references. It was you that began the edit war.
 * I placed my edit in the place that I thought would support the article and bring balance to the page.
 * I placed an edit that was one statement consisting of two sentences after shrinking it down as per your request but you chose to insert your comment right in the middle of it which distorted the well referenced information.
 * We should think carefully about what we are doing and respect the other editors. If you go after another editor edits without a discussion, I am sure you would not want that to happen to you.
 * I placed an edit that was backed up by one of our excellent resources. I don't understand why you have a problem with it. Just so you know I have other edits for the this page that will bring a balance, other views, to this page but you might not like them. How are you going to handle that?
 * Please return my original edit back to the page.
 * Ok I am returning this quote to the article.Red Rose 13 (talk) 19:23, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Proposed wording changes
Governor Sheng, As I am researching the references here and when I see some things that need to be changed that have been posted, I will bring it here for discussion and will wait 3 days before making changes. However when I add information from a good to excellent source, I will just post. posted this on 2/17 Red Rose 13 (talk) 15:28, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Franciscans vs Zanic
Wording from the Resource page 161 - Maunder Our Lady... The Franciscans used the success of the pilgrimage shrine at Medjugorje in their argument, but insisted that the apparitions had occurred spontaneously at the initiative of the Gospa; the bishop, on the other hand, regarded the emergence of the apparitions as hallucinations that had been manipulated to fuel support for the Franciscan cause. Wording on this page The Franciscans used the apparitions to promote their interests, claiming that they come from the Madonna, while the bishop claimed that they were a product of Franciscan manipulation. Proposed sentence: In the struggle between the Franciscans and Zanic, the Franciscans used the success of the Medjugorje shrine in their presentation and insisted the apparitions were completely initiated by the Madonna; Zanic believed that the apparitions were hallucinations and that the Franciscans were using them "to fuel support for the Franciscan cause". ________________________________

Franciscans vs Zanic #2
Primary sources on Wikipedia we need to discuss (1) using primary sources on Wikipedia and (2) using primary sources for controversial posts,

Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published sources, making sure that all majority and significant minority views that have appeared in those sources are covered (see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view). If no reliable sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it.