Talk:Our Lady of Sorrows

Image

I noticed the following comment in the article:

"In iconography, Our Lady of Sorrows is represented as the Virgin Mary wounded by seven swords in her heart."

It might good if someone could find and upload an image of the Virgin Mary with the seven swords. It could serve as an additional image for the article.

--Aquarius Rising 21:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Mary Watches Jesus Suffer and Die upon the Cross.

What is that language where verbs use Upper case ? --193.56.241.75 09:19, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

The names of the mysteries are titles for the meditations which they encompass, and the article uses proper capitalisation for titles. As this very encyclopaedia says,

A title is also the name of a work, such as a book, film, piece of art, audio recording, website, wikipedia page, etc. Depending on what kind of work the title refers to, it will have its own standard formatting rules.

--Marlow4 00:05, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Page merge

I've attempted to bring up discussion at Talk: Seven Dolours of the Virgin. Alekjds ^talk 01:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, merge the two articles. It is foolish to have two separate articles about the same topic.76.26.112.134 12:36, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

This was done 15 September 2007. (Noting for the sake of record's clarity.) Carl.bunderson (talk) 18:45, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Order in gallery

Future perfect: Please quote the Wikipolicy that says which artwork comes first. Do you have a written policy for that? Or is it a self determinaton by you? Also "one of them is a definite copyvio"? If it is a copyvio, why is it still in Commons? I think you edit is jumping the gun here. Explain your edits instead of reverting. I think chron order is best. And FYI, this article is about a "devotion". History2007 (talk) 10:54, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

No policy, of course, just something I thought made sense. No objections against chronological order – but then, of course, the item I put at the bottom will again remain there, wouldn't it? (Do you have dating information for the Seville one? It certainly doesn't look older than 18th cent to me, quite possibly considerably younger.) The Russian icon would have to be re-ordered; its current position seems pretty random anyway. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:14, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

OK, then go ahead and reorder it chronologically, that would be best. History2007 (talk) 16:47, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

By the way, had the statues you question been in the US, you may have had an argument about copyvio. But the statues are in Holland and Spain. Please see: Commons:Freedom of panorama. As you can see there, in the US there is a red flag for artwork and a green light for buildings. For Spain and Holland where the statues are located, there is no red flag for artwork. So as stated there, by article 18 of the Dutch copyright act and article 35 of the Spanish Royal Legislative Decree 1/1996 these depictions are fine and not a copyvio. History2007 (talk) 17:54, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Our lady of victories

It says the article of Naxxar (village in Malta), that their patron saint is "Our Lady of Victories". When searching for this, there are loads of search results, most of them being about schools, monastries, with a name like that. What does that mean, 'Our lady of Victories'?

I went to the feast in Naxxar, and the biggest statue, which I believe depicted this saint, was a woman, unveiled, smiling, holding a bloody sabre (maybe a scimitar) in one hand, and a decapitated male's head in the other. The male's skin and characteristics were darker, so I am guessing (based on Malta's history) that he was a Muslim, maybe a corsair.

213.165.179.229 (talk) 11:07, 5 September 2011 (UTC)