Talk:Thomas (bishop of Finland)

Successful good article nomination

I am glad to say that this article which was nominated for good article status has succeeded. This is how the article, as of June 30, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Pass – but I think some further improvements could be made to the prose regarding the image captions and the sentence concerning who was to oversee Bp. Thomas’ resignation.

2. Factually accurate?: Pass – accurate as far as I can ascertain.

3. Broad in coverage?: Pass – topic seems to suffer from a lack of historical information which is no one’s fault, but the addition of possible misidentifications of Bishop Thomas is a nice fature.

4. Neutral point of view?: Pass – no problems here.

5. Article stability? Neutral – Flurry of activity prior to nomination, but stable since that time.

6. Images?: Pass – no problems of which I am aware.

If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status. — jackturner3 13:25, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Title

Come on! "Bishop Thomas"? I think this needs some disambiguation. Srnec 15:02, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

He is just known as "Bishop Thomas" (piispa Tuomas) in all sources. Changing that to "Bishop Thomas of Finland" is naturally possible, if other Bishop Thomas' are to appear in Wikipedia. --Drieakko 15:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I think "Thomas, Bishop of Finland" is preferred Wikipedia form. There are already other bishops named Thomas on Wikipedia, e.g. two named Thomas Bek. Srnec 17:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, quite right. Doing the move right now. --Drieakko 06:30, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Denomination?

Was the term "Roman Catholic" in use at the time of Thomas's bishopric? Would "Catholic" be a better term?Wkharrisjr (talk) 18:41, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Battle of Neva

Historian Aarno Karimo in his book Kumpujen Yosta Part 2, pp. 65-74 (WSOY 1930) has a theory Thomas was allied with the Folkunga opposition to Birger hence Norwegians were a natural ally. According to this theory Thomas as the religious leader and the mightiest lord of the South-Western Finland wanted an independent position from Sweden and with victory against Novgorod and the Karelians would have the clout to achieve this, his own kingdom, under papal protection. As an excuse to the campaign he used the papal letter urging crusade against Tavastians which he forged changing the goal as against Novgorod. Also this theory would motivate the realignment of the papal chain of command detaching Thomas from Sweden and why Thomas is mentioned as the leader of the campaign.Jmatsv (talk) 02:14, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

2nd reassesment

Thomas (bishop of Finland)

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: delisted (t · c) buidhe 23:01, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

As mentioned in Wikipedia:Main_Page/Errors, this article has been tagged with three different yellow maintenance tag. Contains heaps of unsourced claims and probably original research. --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 16:32, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

• Speedy delist - I sincerely think almost this entire article is original research. About 95% of this article is either unsourced or sourced to only primary source ancient letters and such. This does not meet the good article criteria by a mile. Hog Farm _Talk 00:20, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

• Speedy delist the version that was awarded GA in 2007 has too much original research to meet GA now, and over the last 13 years, the article has just got worse with OR. It is nowhere near current GA standards. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:30, 21 February 2021 (UTC)