Talk:Nostradamus/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Full citation needed

References Kuzneski 2000 and Leoni 2000 are not defined. DrKay (talk) 16:07, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Kuzneski is now changed to Leroy. Leoni date corrected. --PL (talk) 10:02, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Which references?

I see that Isambard Kingdom feels there's too much reference in the article to Lemesurier. Trouble is, there's not too much else in English that's reliable and authoritative, apart possibly from Ian Wilson (see list of reputable Sources). All Lemesurier's information comes from the reputable foreign sources listed. I suggest that Isambard Kingdom undertake the work. --PL (talk) 17:09, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

And meanwhile the banner is being misapplied. It's designed to address lack of references, not disputes over which ones. So I suggest that a more appropriate one be found, if necessary. --PL (talk) 10:27, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

With regards to other authoritative sources outside of 'Lemesurier' please see: http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/Examskeptics/Playfair_goodskeptics.html http://skepdic.com/nostrada.html From the Nostradamus expert Elmar Gruber:- http://cura.free.fr/xxx/26grub1.html http://ramkat.free.fr/nerg2.html Smithsurf (talk) 00:01, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

terrible article

This article reads in tone and content like a skeptic debunking website written by james randi, christopher hitchins and richard dawkins. The only thing I can think of being worse than this, is if every woo website on the internet had their nostradamus interpretations copied into this article. This is a bias article, and it is supposed to be an article about an historical character, sure you can mention how there are woo's out there that interpret his works however they like, and are "Frustrating", but I don't want to hear the same tone and content in every section of the article. Keep the article simple, if you want to debunk all interpretations and generally poopoo Nostradamus, then make articles about his particular works, or make a new article named something like, "Nostradamus in pop-culture spiritualism and how it is offensive to certain people's sensibilities" 27.33.119.145 (talk) 15:37, 17 October 2016 (UTC) Makes a lot of sense why, having looked closer, almost all of the biased parts appear to either be verbatim from "peter lemesurier's" book, or written/edited by him. Looking at his twitter, the guy seems to be on a "mission" to destroy nostradamus because of how the internet-woos have taken to his work(but what haven't they?). Can we please remove these problems? The article is locked. 27.33.119.145 (talk) 15:56, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Disagree. the article is roughly 4800 words long. the first 2000 words contain no "debunking" and are mainly focused on historical information about his life. The lead section comments on the criticism of his predictions, which is correct as a summary of his work should note the fact that there are reliable sources who criticize his work. The origin of works section naturally contains sourced references from scholarly material as to the origin of his works, which obviously not being magical in nature, contain information on other writings which were influential on his work. This would be the case in any article on the works of an author, be it a work of fiction, history, prophesy or otherwise. I can only imagine that you aren't happy with the Interpretations and Alternative view sections as the rest of it seems quite clear cut. There are a few sentences which seem derivative i.e.

• "Due to the subjective nature of these interpretations, however, no two of them agree on exactly what he predicted, whether for the past or for the future.[63] Many of these do agree, though, that particular predictions refer, for example, to the French Revolution, Napoleon, Adolf Hitler,[64][c] both world wars, and the nuclear destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki."

and

• "There is also an evident consensus among popular authors that he predicted whatever major event had just happened at the time of each book's publication, from the Apollo moon landings, through the death of Diana, Princess of Wales in 1997, and the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster in 1986,[65] to the events of 9/11: this 'movable feast' aspect appears to be characteristic of the genre.[63]"

These two sentences cite sources which talk about his prophesies in a general sense but these sources do not confirm that there is a consensus as stated in the sentence:

• and thousands of private websites, suggesting not only that the Prophecies are genuine but that Nostradamus was a true prophet

This conclusion (and others like it in the INTERPRETATIONS and ALTERNATE VIEWS sections) based on the cited sources seem like original research and we should rewrite it. What would your initial suggestions be? P.S. Make an account 58.246.77.14 (talk) 07:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

http://www.bookoflife.org/gamma/OI/oi_vii.i.f.htm

Nostradamus has tried to contact Lemonhead but he does not respond. here some of my this incarnation work' currently I am taking over the US Military Complex and banning demons from life.

1. arcmichael

you people are like in the stone ages. I just gave you brexit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.27.175.2 (talk) 01:46, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

No consensus

It is wrong to suggest that there is any consensus about Nostradamus, much less that there "is also an evident consensus among popular authors that he predicted whatever major event had just happened at the time of each book's publication". The consensus of most people, and virtually all academics, is that Nostradamus' prophecies are nonsense. I have not seen any of his alleged prophecies that actually predicts an event that subsequently occurred.203.80.61.102 (talk) 20:47, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

In reply:- There actually 'is' a consensus among a number of academics who study Nostradamus, i.e. the ones with the linguistic skills to read his works in their original 16th century format. This being: he was more of a literary man than a mystic. He had studied historical events and believed the past would repeat itself in the future. He wasn't actually seeing the future, but projecting past events 'into the future.' The technique used was called the 'Janus principle' (but when put to the test it failed to predict the future). Despite a number of people having come to this conclusion, they are lost in the fog of all the other predictions, usually made by people who don't have a great enough grasp of the 16th Century French to be reliable. Smithsurf (talk) 01:44, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

It could be worded better, but what it's saying is that popular authors tend to interpret his "prophecies" as being about whatever happened most recently (and in this context, "popular" is intended to be directly as opposed to academics, etc - ie the pop-culture books you'd see at a typical new-age bookstore.) What Lemesurier means by a 'movable feast' is that each new pop-culture "Nostradamus predicted!" books reinterprets his prophecies around whatever is important to them, and the consensus here is referring to how those pop-culture writers in particular all constantly change their opinions on what the prophecies meant after each big event rather than having one consistent interpretation. --Aquillion (talk) 20:54, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

People Have Alleged That Falan Gong Persecution Was The July 1999 Prediction

It is indeed an allegation, but one of prudence too. The Falan Gong persecution began on July 20, 1999 in a country which the Mongols where at war with.68.47.65.239 (talk) 21:06, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Even this social science book references the claim about the persecution[1].68.47.65.239 (talk) 21:15, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Date of Birth

There seems to be unnecessary confusion for his date of birth. Nostradamus was born on December 14th 1503 using the old Gregorian calendar, which translates to December 23 in the current Julian calendar. The transition from the Julian to Gregorian calendar did not start until 1582 - 79 years after his birth. "Nostradamus and his Prophecies" by Edgar Leoni, Bell Publishing Company, NY, 1982,p15 Terry Macro (talk) 06:56, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Fired for letting family die?

[www.notablebiographies.com/Ni-Pe/Nostradamus.html This bio] says he didn't just "continue to travel" after his family died of plague, but took such a credibility hit for not stopping it that Scaliger (not specifically named there) sent him packing (and his in-laws wanted their dowry back). If that can be verified (or at least attributed to an esteemed historian), the article would do well to mention it.

I might look harder later if nobody finds out sooner. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:17, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Prediction of COVID-19 outbreak

I checked the links that are given for the COVID-19 predictions, and they appear to be referencing a 2003 book, written in German (which I can't read). However, my wondering is if this book actually has any real 'prediction' in it, shouldn't it be quoted? Mulstev (talk) 03:07, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Other theories and research not yet mentioned here

I present these links for consideration of those interested in the topic, for the page is lacking at least two major theories. I am not adept at modifying wikipedia.

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&u=https://lesfilsdelavallee.fr/index.php/fr/les-centuries-du-mage-nostradamus-un-chemin-vers-le-tresor-des-templiers-1ere-partie https://web.archive.org/web/20171022120414/http://www.philipcoppens.com/nostradamus.html https://www.eyeofthepsychic.com/nostradamus/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.10.44.213 (talk) 17:13, 20 November 2020 (UTC)