Talk:Jovian (emperor)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Name[edit]

The general sense is current and much used today in astronomy. Also Perhaps the emperor should go to Jovian, Roman Emperor or Jovian (Roman Emperor)?
Jorge Stolfi 17:39, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

No, this is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary.--Panairjdde 17:33, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This could use a disambiguation page, as the astronomy usage, the Roman emporer, the language use, and the Roman god Jupiter are enough to justify it. StuRat 18:59, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
I see only two uses, the astronomic usage, as adjective of planet Jupiter, and the Roman emperor. One is related to the dictionary, the other to the encyclopedia. I am against a disambiguation page; if you want, you can put a notice at the beginning of the page, if there exists a jovian (astronomy) article, that is.--Panairjdde 07:52, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
The 4 uses are:
Referring specifically to the planet Jupiter, alone.
first, astronomycal
Referring to the class of planets like Jupiter, which includes Saturn and may or may not include Uranus and Neptune.
again astronomycal,
Referring to the Roman emporer.
second
Referring to the expression "By Jove !".
Jove is not Jovian.
StuRat 03:58, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
Again, you should understand that this is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. If you must, just write a note at the beginning of the page, something like "For the planet, see Jupiter."--Panairjdde 13:00, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
I agree wholeheartedly with User:Jorge Stolfi. This article does not deserve primary disambiguation. Someone looking for Jovian is much more likely to be looking for the adjective related to either the god or the planet named after him, and this one isn't more likely than the others on the disambiguation page. See Wikipedia:Disambiguation, its section on deciding to disambiguate, and Wikipedia:Naming conventions and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (precision)#If the two titles usually have a different meaning. Or just look at some of the discussions at Wikipedia:Requested moves to see how these problems are normally resolved.
I'm not going to take further action right now, but may get back to this sometime. Meanwhile, if anyone else renames it or takes this to Wikipedia:Requested moves, let me know on my talk page. Gene Nygaard (talk) 14:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Note that inappropriate links on the article's "What links here" are one clue that a change should be made.
Note also that many of the links on "what links here" which are appropriate to this article are only there as a result of that big, ugly honking navigation box on the bottom of the page. All of them could be fixed in one fell swoop if this article is renamed, merely by changing the link in the template. The existence of those links due (only to that obnoxious template whose purpose would be as well served by categories and lists) on the "What links here" page makes it much more difficult to find the ones which are inappropriate to this article.
Having "Jovian" as a disambiguation page would make future cleanup of those links easier. Gene Nygaard (talk) 14:52, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Date of dead[edit]

In the beggining of the article it is stated 17. february 364. Later on, it is said that he died from a wound 26 June 363. I don't know which of those two dates are correct, but that should be corrected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stalker314314 (talkcontribs) 15:48, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Jovian (emperor)JovianPrimary topic. Page views: Emperor 4259, fiction 415, poet (partial title match) 226. Marcus Qwertyus 16:50, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

  • Support. Page view stats indicate a clear primary topic. Jenks24 (talk) 01:27, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Support Bravo, good proposition. --WhiteWriter speaks 09:46, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose; Jovian should be a redirect to Jupiter. Powers T 01:37, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Jovian is a rare adjectival form meaning of or like Jove or Jupitor. Earthian can rarely mean of or like Earth but it most commonly refers to the series. Marcus Qwertyus 07:09, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
    • Terran would be a more apt analogy (though that article is properly a disambiguation page because there are many more uses for "Terran" than for "Jovian"). Nonetheless, I still believe "Jovian" primarily refers to attributes of the planet, particularly the Jovian moons. Powers T 15:31, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Support definitely a good idea, per statistics it's very clear which is dominant.Aldux (talk) 13:07, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose per LtPowers. I think "Jovian" as an adjective meaning "of Jupiter" is more common than any other meaning. I don't think it's a "rare adjectival form" as suggested; it is quite common in science-related works. Search for "jovian" on google scholar and you will have to really search to find stuff that is not about the planet Jupiter. This is the reason the first entry on Jovian refers to it being an adjective for Jupiter. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:57, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Anti-Pagan Edicts[edit]

This article states that Jovian issued an edict "on 11 September subjecting those who worshiped ancestral gods to the death penalty. He extended the same punishment on 23 December to participation in any pagan ceremony (even private ones)" providing a citation from "Vlasis Rassias A history of unconditional love (2005); currently in publication only in Greek, as Μια ιστορία αγάπης." I cannot speak on the credentials of this source, but this claim seems unfounded. I have never read anywhere of Jovian issuing any such laws. Based on this table here (which is based of Coleman-Norton's Roman State and Christian Church) no such laws were issued by Jovian. Unless anyone has access to Pharr's translation of the Theodosian Code or another primary or scholarly source to verify this claim, this sentence should be deleted from the article. --TJYoung93 — Preceding unsigned comment added by TJYoung93 (talkcontribs) 06:02, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Jovian's Christianity[edit]

Do we know if Jovian adhered to the Arian or the Athanasian flavour of Christianity? If we do, it might be worth including. Q·L·1968 04:27, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, on closer inspection, I see he was a supporter of Athanasius. I'll add something to that effect to the infobox. Q·L·1968 23:32, 22 December 2015 (UTC)