Talk:Joan of Arc, Trial: Difference between revisions
imported>Richard Jensen (need keyword Joan) |
imported>Richard Jensen m (Talk:Trial of Joan of Arc moved to Talk:Joan of Arc, Trial: keep with main article) |
Revision as of 16:25, 29 April 2007
Workgroup category or categories | History Workgroup, Religion Workgroup, Law Workgroup [Categories OK] |
Article status | Developing article: beyond a stub, but incomplete |
Underlinked article? | No |
Basic cleanup done? | Yes |
Checklist last edited by | James F. Perry 22:29, 27 March 2007 (CDT) |
To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist.
Initial content
The initial content for the Trial of Joan of Arc article was taken from the Trial subsection of the Wikipedia article on Joan of Arc of January 5, 2007. James F. Perry 11:05, 5 January 2007 (CST)
Section headers (January 11)
The section headers have been added primarily to organize the material by providing an outline. Prometheus is regarded as a symbol of the fight against tyrannical power. The use of this imagery in the section headers may be "unencyclopedic". Keep in mind the overall purpose - outlining and organizing. The final draft is some distance off. James F. Perry 11:02, 11 January 2007 (CST)
No Wikipedia content
As of February 14, 2007, there is no Wikipedia content in this article, all of the original such content having been removed some time earlier. James F. Perry 16:29, 14 February 2007 (CST)
First session - the matter of the oath
The Trial transcript goes on to report "Jeanne . . . swore to answer truthfully whatever should be asked her, which she knew, concerning matters of faith, and was silent with regard to the said condition, that she would not tell or reveal to any person the revelations made to her."
I'm not sure what this means. Historians have generally rejected the notion that Jeanne took such an unlimited oath, instead asserting that the transcript was tampered with in this respect. Manchon, in his Rehabiliation trial deposition, did assert that pressure was brought to bear on him and the other notaries to doctor the transcript in places (though he did also say that it was by and large accurate). The fact that the question of the oath was repeatedly returned to in subsequent sessions seems to support this notion. In matters of legal proceedings, then as now, is it ot held sufficient to take the oath once and that is good for all sessions? James F. Perry 16:10, 21 February 2007 (CST)
EDIT
Changed your tag from Category:Law Workgroup (Top) to Category:Law Workgroup, the TOP entries are entries which all members of the workgroup should work on as much as possible. I think in the case of the law workgroup it might be better to first make a good entry for the lemmata LAW.
need keyword Joan
too many trials otherwise Richard Jensen 13:54, 26 April 2007 (CDT)
- History Category Check
- General Category Check
- Religion Category Check
- Law Category Check
- Advanced Articles
- Nonstub Articles
- Internal Articles
- History Advanced Articles
- History Nonstub Articles
- History Internal Articles
- Religion Advanced Articles
- Religion Nonstub Articles
- Religion Internal Articles
- Law Advanced Articles
- Law Nonstub Articles
- Law Internal Articles
- Developed Articles
- History Developed Articles
- Religion Developed Articles
- Law Developed Articles
- Developing Articles
- History Developing Articles
- Religion Developing Articles
- Law Developing Articles
- Stub Articles
- History Stub Articles
- Religion Stub Articles
- Law Stub Articles
- External Articles
- History External Articles
- Religion External Articles
- Law External Articles
- History Underlinked Articles
- Underlinked Articles
- Religion Underlinked Articles
- Law Underlinked Articles
- History Cleanup
- General Cleanup
- Religion Cleanup
- Law Cleanup