Talk:Africa (Petrarch)

A few problems with the article

• The image of a book cover doesn't add value to the article, in my opinion. It's from a modern translation and doesn't tell us anything about Petrarch's poem. An image from an early printed edition would be a nice touch, if one can be located.
• The footnotes list page numbers, but don't tell us which author/work is being cited. This is a problem.
• The "itinerary" of the second Punic war is unnecessary. If a reader wants to know more about the history behind Petrarch's poem, s/he can read Second Punic War.

I'm removing the image and the "itinerary"; hopefully someone can tell us what book the footnotes are citing, so we can format the citations properly. --Akhilleus (talk) 21:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Doug, I have no interest in getting into an edit war, but I notice that you've basically reverted my changes, without responding to what I wrote above. Frankly, I don't understand why the article needs a shot of the cover of a 20th century translation, especially when its graphic design is uninspiring. Nor do I understand why this article needs to give a chronology of the Second Punic War; one of the strengths of a Wiki is that it's easy to link to related pages, so we don't have to duplicate material that has its own article. --Akhilleus (talk) 22:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

• You asked for an image of the book cover = I gave it to you.
• The outline is taken directly from the book on page 19 which is basically an outline of the book itself.
• The page numbers are so noted as from the English translation.

--Doug ^talk 23:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Doug, thanks for the response. When I wrote "early printed edition" above I meant early--like Renaissance-era. A picture like [1] is the kind of thing I'm thinking of; I have no idea how easily one could be found.

The footnotes need to be formatted according to WP:CITE; I'll try to fix this when I get a chance.

I don't think the chronology belongs in this article. A link to Second Punic War will suffice. --Akhilleus (talk) 23:22, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I've taken out the book cover. If you find a "real early edition" version put it in. The outline is part of the Introduction and describes what the book is about. It is the last page before the Books so was definitely intended to be the outline of the book. Thanks for correcting the footnotes. --Doug ^talk 23:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Doug, I understand that Bergin and Wilson provide a chronology of the 2nd Punic War in their introduction. Obviously, that's not part of Petrarch's poem, but something included to help readers understand the poem. However, we're writing an encyclopedia article about the poem, so our aims are not the same as Bergin and Wilson's. And I don't see why we need to include the chronology, since we can simply direct readers to Second Punic War. --Akhilleus (talk) 23:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Took out the outline you are objecting to and put in wording directing readers to the article on the Second Punic War. Also replaced the book cover of the English translation you are objecting to with a picture of the main character. Hope these improvements meet your approval.--Doug ^talk 12:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I also did the improvements on the references for the Notes. Hope that is correct. --Doug ^talk 13:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

P.P.S. I have done some investigation and found that worldwide this "representation" of the English translation (even to color) is pretty much the way it is in all English speaking countries (as well as many others). In all Universities in the United States, Canada, and most of Europe (as well as South Africa) they show this "representation" I have supplied as their book (which is mostly available worldwide). Therefore I have re-entered this in only the Note section where it is referenced. I have even made it real small. If you object and really believe this is out of place and not correct, then just remove the image. I won't loose any sleep over it. Just wanted to let you know what I am doing. Hope this is alright with you. --Doug ^talk 15:31, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

P.P.P.S. Corrected the Bibliography to make it clear that this is the English translation. Hope this is O.K. --Doug ^talk 19:54, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Doug. I changed the reference format a bit, and got rid of the picture of the book cover--I really don't think WP readers are all that interested in what a modern English translation of the Africa looks like. --Akhilleus (talk) 04:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

"Main characters?"

Being mentioned on one page wouldn't seem to qualify, and an index nominum keyed to an English translation has no place in this article. What would be appropriate, would be to state that the poem's major characters include...and list them (the ones who truly are of principal importance), with wikilinks. Of course, even better would be, say, a sentence or two characterizing the role played by Cicero (and the other important figures) in the poem. As long as we're just counting page numbers, I'm afraid this could be part of one of Doug Coldwell's WP:OR number codes, which (as anyone who has followed the long arc of his edits knows) he believes reveal secrets concerning the New Testament, Medieval literature, and Renaissance literature. Wareh (talk) 02:54, 8 February 2010 (UTC)