Talk:Poena cullei

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Poena cullei/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Royroydeb (talk · contribs) 09:55, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

  • The lead is very short, it should be expanded.eraser Undone
OK, I'll do that
  • "From several sources, the 19th century historian Theodor Mommsen compiled and described in detail"- reword. Done
Ok, I'll do that
  • When was that first person whipped? I mean date. Done
Hmm?? It is neither known nor relevant.
  • The animals can be linked. Done
You mean link on monkey? We do not know what sort of monkey was used, and it is a perfectly common word.
  • Who is Cicero? Done
Just about the most renowned politician, lawyer and author in 1BC, Late Republican Rome?
He should be linked. RRD13 (talk) 16:01, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

RRD13 (talk) 09:55, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

He is already linked in the section bearing his name. One link should be enough, don't you think?Arildnordby (talk) 17:04, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for taking on the review.Arildnordby (talk) 10:14, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
  • What was the ritual? Provide some information about it. Done
That is what the article does, in several instantiations of it.
  • "600-700 years" please write the numerals in words, since the previous ones are mentioned in the said. Done
Nope.
Yes, it should be done for consistency.RRD13 (talk) 13:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
DoneArildnordby (talk) 14:16, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
  • "As can......"- please provide reference for this paragraph. Done
No reference needed beyond quoted text. This is NOT interpretation needing ref.
  • Reword the first sentence under possible antecedents section. Done
Why?
The sentence has become too big. RRD13 (talk) 13:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
DOneArildnordby (talk) 14:16, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
  • In brackets write who is Plutarch. Done
Why? He is linked.
What I meant is you should write "Roman historian Plutarch". RRD13 (talk) 13:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
DoneArildnordby (talk) 14:16, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
  • In the incident of Caius Villius, how can a man be shut up in a vessel or jar? They are not big for humans. Done
A "large jar" is the translation in the reference, in others, "vessel" is used.
  • Instead of "Donald C. Kyle (2012)", it should be "in 2012, Donald C.Kyle a abc"
Incorrect. Donald C. Kyle (2012) is the correct form of referring to a particular publication of Kyle, published in 2012. Changes to Kyle (2012), though.Arildnordby. (talk) 11:57, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Mention the nationality of Cicero.
Done
  • What do you mean by "provincial" level? Done
A perfectly standard distinction between "central state level" and "provincial level". Today, we speak of "state level" vs. "municipal level", for example.
  • Again before Suetonius, write "the Roman historian Suetonius".
OK
  • In history, we write circa, not probably. Done
Nope. "probably" is weaker than "circa".
  • Who are the "many"?
Do not understand where you refer to
The word "many" sounds a bit vague in this context. You should mention like "many abcians/ many xyzians". RRD13 (talk) 13:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
  • I think it should be "The penalty in the sack". Done
Wrong. "Penalty of the sack is the standard phrase, see, for example: https://www.google.com/search?hl=no&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=%22penalty+of+the+sack%22&tbs=,bkv:p&num=10#hl=no&q=%22penalty+of+the+sack%22&tbm=bks&tbs=bkv:p

RRD13 (talk) 09:15, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

More comments to follow.Arildnordby (talk) 11:51, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
  • The last sentence of the last section is uncited. Done
Sextus Roscius case extremely famous and uncontroversially true, but that last sentence definitely needed a direct link for further exploration.
  • The lead should be expanded.
I'll coming there.

I still do not understand WHERE in the text this "many" you refer to occur. Please give sectionArildnordby (talk) 14:04, 11 March 2014 (UTC) RRD13 (talk) 13:48, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

The "many" is under the section named "Revival by Constantine the Great". Done

RRD13 (talk) 05:04, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

THanks! I have changed vague "many" into "several", as well as added ref to a modern author effectively backing up the same view on obsoleteness of p.c up to the times of Constantine.Arildnordby (talk) 09:44, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
That leaves only one thing undone that is expanding the lead. Here we can see that many references lack accessdate which should be put. RRD13 (talk) 04:16, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
I expanded the lead in the "only way possible", namely to briefly describe the different stages in the historical application of the punishment. Thus, the lead is now a micro-article on its own, without the detailed referencing and quoting contained in main article.Arildnordby (talk) 12:54, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Addition of accessdates is still left. Hope you solve it soon. RRD13 (talk) 13:02, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be sufficient to just add accesdates in the bibliographical section, rather than in the main text as well? After all, the links in the main text are just the same links as in the biblio, only page specification included?Arildnordby (talk) 13:07, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Have added accesdates on biblio sectionArildnordby (talk) 13:22, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Leges regiae[edit]

May I suggest that the editor read leges regiae, he will gather important relevant information on the history of the poena cullei.01:43, 26 February 2016 (UTC)01:44, 26 February 2016 (UTC)