This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rome, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the city of Rome and ancient Roman history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
I have no idea why this page is such a hot target for vandals, but can we apply for semi-protection please? This is insane. Q·L·1968☿ 21:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
In the last months there have been exactly two active vandals, both on the same date (January 28), one during a six-minute time span of consecutive edits, the other with just one edit. This is hardly a cause for semi-protection. --Lambiam 08:47, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Really? The page is on my watchlist, and every time I look at new changes to it, it's either vandalism or reversion. Perhaps you're right though. Q·L·1968☿ 16:13, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
There is no source cited for this list of 'the most common' deities to which Roman temples were dedicated. I have seen alayses of dedicatory inscriptions for some provinces, but not for the empire as a whole or for the city of rlol ome by itself. Lacking that, the current list looks suspiciously like "twelve deities off the top of someone's head". --Nantonos (talk) 14:17, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
The efficient but minimal introduction should be expanded into a full article. The List should be separated and moved to a new List of Roman Temples for expansion. I don't know how to perform the split correctly. Responses are invited. Haploidavey (talk) 12:54, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Not to mention the dubiety of the prominence given Arthur's Oven, the only illustration other than the Temple of Hercules. You're right about that list. When the list article is created is should be placed as a link at the top of Glossary of ancient Roman religion, where there's a relevant mention looking ahead to this possibility. Roman temple needs to incorporate both an expanded section on templum from the Glossary (not too abstruse and lengthy, though, since this is potentially a general-interest article) and a lot of heavy-duty architectural discussion. I'd say this is the kind of thing that could be worked into GA status. I'm in a dash at the moment but will have more thoughts later. (As for your real question, I'm technically useless.) Cynwolfe (talk) 13:42, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Forgot to get back to this. Do you know of any good editors with an interest in ancient architecture? I see this as having three components: the templum (religious), the building of temples by VIPs (politics and society), and the architecture itself. What else? I'm in one of my fits of being distracted by Belgian sculptors, for some reason, but do remind me of this article if you have thoughts. Cynwolfe (talk) 02:58, 23 July 2010 (UTC)