Revision as of 01:00, 20 October 2017 editInternetArchiveBot (talk | contribs)Bots, Pending changes reviewers5,387,630 edits Notification of altered sources needing review #IABot (v1.6beta)← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:41, 20 November 2017 edit undoInternetArchiveBot (talk | contribs)Bots, Pending changes reviewers5,387,630 edits Notification of altered sources needing review #IABot (v1.6.1) (Balon Greyjoy)Next edit → | ||
Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 01:00, 20 October 2017 (UTC) | Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 01:00, 20 October 2017 (UTC) | ||
== External links modified == | |||
Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
I have just modified 3 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review ]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes: | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130216021402/http://www.roman-britain.org/places/bourton_grounds.htm to http://www.roman-britain.org/places/bourton_grounds.htm | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100614030329/http://duke.edu/web/classics/grbs/FTexts/45/Lateiner.pdf to http://www.duke.edu/web/classics/grbs/FTexts/45/Lateiner.pdf | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100614030329/http://duke.edu/web/classics/grbs/FTexts/45/Lateiner.pdf to http://www.duke.edu/web/classics/grbs/FTexts/45/Lateiner.pdf | |||
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. | |||
{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} | |||
Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 08:41, 20 November 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 08:41, 20 November 2017
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Glossary of ancient Roman religion article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Glossary of ancient Roman religion article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Resources The following subpages contain information from the article, mainly primary sources and translations, preserved here to facilitate the creation of articles on some of the subjects |
point of this page
"glossaries", or rather non-lists, non-articles, non-glossaries, non-dictdefs such as this one are a disaster, or they would be if they were not almost entirely unknown and unlinked. I stumbled upon this because somebody linked exta "entrails" to this page. Now exta, like all the other terms in this "glossary" are encycylopedic topics, or subtopics under the general topic of "ancient Roman religion". Either exta is a topic notable and substantial enough for a standalone article, or it should be treated as a sub-topic, section or paragraph organised topically, i.e. under "animal sacrifice in ancient Roman religion", and not alphbetical in some forgotten "glossary". The reason is that topical coverage is supposed to evolve and develop in topical context, including merging and splitting of topically related pages, not some strange "alphabetical" approach to a heap of loosely related terms. I will try to fix the "exta" problem, but I really don't see any non-harmful potential for this page as a whole. --dab (𒁳) 14:43, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
- Please see list of incoming links to the article. The benefit is that technical terms of Roman religion can be explained without offering a digression in the main articles. I've written many many articles on Roman religion, and found this glossary an invaluable resource to link to. The introduction suggests why terminology is a particular problem of ancient Roman religion. On your personal preference that such list articles not exist, please see MOS:GLOSSARIES. Or take it to WikiProject Glossaries. Tagging doesn't do anything to reduce article clutter. However, this glossary has indeed served as an incubator for independent articles: votum began that way, for instance. Obviously others could be created. A disambiguation page is most certainly not what's needed: perhaps you mean a set index article? Cynwolfe (talk) 19:41, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
No entry for numen or genius?
These are both extremely significant concepts in roman religion and should have sections.173.56.79.75 (talk) 04:20, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
They both have their own articles, and mainly this is a glossary of technical priestly vocabulary, but readers should probably be directed to these topics. Last time I looked, though, neither numen nor genius was satisfying as a treatment of these concepts in Roman religion. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:12, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
structure into concepts
I am about to translate the article into French. I find it (sorry for the criticism) messy. I would reorganize it into concepts (as promised in the introductory chapter), for example abominari goes under omen, exauguratio under augur, effatio , putting arbor, lucus and nemus under the same concept of "wood". --Diligent (talk) 09:19, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Suggestion: Refs and notes?
Looks like the ref section might benefit from the more scholarly approach of having notes and references be separate. There are lots of repeated refs to different pages in a limited number of sources (e.g., Lintott). Lots o' work though. - Eponymous-Archon (talk) 21:08, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
fastus, nefastus, and festus definitions
According to Agnes Kirsopp Michels' book "The Calendar of the Roman Republic", the official calendrical classification was between dies fasti (days when the courts are open), ordinary dies nefasti (when the courts are not open), and special dies nefasti (marked "NP" on ancient calendar charts) which were more commonly known as feriae or dies feriati (i.e. reserved for public religious ceremonies). The words festus and profestus don't actually fit into that classification scheme, but refer to "cheerful days which should be enjoyed" and the opposite. Ordinary ancient Romans were often not fully aware of abstruse calendar technicalities, so there was already a little confusion in ancient times, and some people used the phrase dies nefasti to refer to unlucky days of ill omen etc. (and other people, such as Gellius, considered them ignorant for doing so). I'm not sure that all this is very well explained in the article as it now stands... AnonMoos (talk) 06:24, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- P.S. In the above remarks, I wasn't distinguishing dies comitiales from dies fasti (another issue discussed in the Agnes Kirsopp Michels book)... AnonMoos (talk) 09:44, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Glossary of ancient Roman religion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120907120812/http://www.roman-britain.org/romano-british-temples.htm to http://www.roman-britain.org/romano-british-temples.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:00, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Glossary of ancient Roman religion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130216021402/http://www.roman-britain.org/places/bourton_grounds.htm to http://www.roman-britain.org/places/bourton_grounds.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100614030329/http://duke.edu/web/classics/grbs/FTexts/45/Lateiner.pdf to http://www.duke.edu/web/classics/grbs/FTexts/45/Lateiner.pdf
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100614030329/http://duke.edu/web/classics/grbs/FTexts/45/Lateiner.pdf to http://www.duke.edu/web/classics/grbs/FTexts/45/Lateiner.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:41, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Categories: