Talk:Johannes Gutenberg
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Johannes Gutenberg article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | This  level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on February 23, 2005 and February 23, 2006. |
Name is probably wrong
editOne of the long names of Gutenberg is "Gensfleisch zur Laden gen. Gutenberg, Johannes" (source: https://www.lagis-hessen.de/pnd/118543768 - also check the article on dewiki: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Gutenberg). This "gen." is short for "genannt", which states that he was known as "Johannes Gutenberg". I suspect someone read this "gen." as "gen", which is an archaic form of "gegen", which is itself an archaic way of saying "zu/zur/zum". The article was created with the "zum Gutenberg" title and suspect this style has sufficiently polluted academic sources. I thus cannot, at this marcus, rule out that the english academic literature calls him so.
I am, however confident that his german name is not "... zum Gutenberg". --83.64.142.10 (talk) 14:46, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- It seems fine. Even German sources called him "zum Gutenberg" before Wikipedia: https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/view/bsb11710202?page=,1 - still strange, he does not seem like nobility. --128.130.239.36 (talk) 16:14, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- “Gensfleisch zur Laden zum Gutenberg“ would most literally translate from modern German to modern English as “gene meat of the stores/magazine of Gutenberg (“good mountain” - but let’s not go overboard with literal translation).” Interpreting the meaning that this would likely have had in the language of the day, one might render it “Johannes, Issue of the Bounty of Gutenberg,” with Gutenberg referring to the family estate. 205.178.98.205 (talk) 04:34, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
- Personal translations like the above, or personal analysis of reliable sources doesn't really help us here. We need other reliable sources to back up what you're saying, otherwise there's nothing we can do; tis the limitations of Wikipedia. Aza24 (talk) 17:39, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- “Gensfleisch zur Laden zum Gutenberg“ would most literally translate from modern German to modern English as “gene meat of the stores/magazine of Gutenberg (“good mountain” - but let’s not go overboard with literal translation).” Interpreting the meaning that this would likely have had in the language of the day, one might render it “Johannes, Issue of the Bounty of Gutenberg,” with Gutenberg referring to the family estate. 205.178.98.205 (talk) 04:34, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
Might be flaws
editTrying to research but I can't because it's not all true 142.161.152.10 (talk) 23:49, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 24 May 2023
edit | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change 1900 as 400th anniversary of death to 500th anniversary of his birth 185.207.63.166 (talk) 19:43, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- Done. It is still uncited but clearly true (and various other Wikipedia articles agree). —Kusma (talk) 20:16, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 23 December 2023
edit| | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
“Gensfleisch zur Laden zum Gutenberg“ would most literally translate from modern German to modern English as “gene meat of the stores/magazine of Gutenberg (“good mountain” - but let’s not go overboard with literal translation).” Interpreting the meaning that this would likely have had in the language of the day, one might render it “Johannes, Issue of the Bounty of Gutenberg,” with Gutenberg referring to the family estate. 205.178.98.205 (talk) 04:26, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Rehsarb (talk) 22:43, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
I assume this comment is picking up on an earlier thread on the same issue. Please do not rely on your personal translations skills! We need modern reliable sources. At the moment, they agree his name is "Johannes Gensfleisch zur Laden zum Gutenberg"–Kapr (p.27) says ""The mainz patricians called themselves after the houses they possessed, and so we find zur Laden [...] zum Genlesich or zum Gutenberg". Gensfleisch is the family name; Laden and Gutenberg are both known residences (cited in the article). If you interpret "the language of the day" (15th-century German) to modern-day English you are always going to get inconstancies; these are two different (albeit similar) languages many centuries apart. Aza24 (talk) 04:30, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
""What was written to me about that marvelous man [Gutenberg] seen at Frankfurt [sic] entirely true. Quote from the Enea Silvio Piccolominis letter, dated 12 March 1455 to cardinal Juan Carvajal +++ Now: there is no reason to put a "sic" after Frankfurt. Piccolomini did not mix up the two cities of Mainz and Frankfurt. In fact, Piccolomini was himself at the Frankfurt fair, where pages of the Gutenberg bible were shown at the printers/publishers booth. His letter is reporting this fact plus the probable consequences in comparison to handwritten bibles. Summary: just remove the erroneous "sic" and perhaps include: Frankfurt (at the trade fair). 2003:C2:F30:4B00:DC55:346C:793:BDA0 (talk) 20:15, 26 February 2024 (UTC)