This article strikes me as being unnecessarily critical. Apart from the rather prosaic lede It is laconic in style and deficient in method, but of pure Latinity, and occasionally relieved by pleasing word-pictures, this section seems unreasonably negative: Mela's descriptive method is peculiar and inconvenient. Instead of treating each continent separately he begins at the Straits of Gibraltar, and describes the countries adjoining the south coast of the Mediterranean; then he moves round by Syria and Asia Minor to the Black Sea, and so returns to Spain along the north shore of the Euxine, Propontis, etc. After treating the Mediterranean islands, he next takes the ocean littoral—to west, north, east and south successively—from Spain and Gaul round to India, from India to Persia, Arabia and Ethiopia; and so again works back to Spain round South Africa. Like most classical geographers he conceives of the continent as surrounded by sea and not extending very far south. The Roman Empire began as a Mediteranean power, that developed within a broader Mediteranean culture, with teh northern parts of the Empire being added later. Furthermore, it is my understanding that in the ancient world, trade and cultureal exchange tended to be along the coasts more than penetrating inland. As such, an approach of "these are the Mediteranean countries; and these are the peripheral countries" seems to me to be quite reasonable. Wardog (talk) 14:25, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Timmyshin's ngram seems to suggest that this is not straightforward. — Amakuru (talk) 12:13, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Pomponius Mela → De situ orbis – This article speaks mostly about the geography treatise, and only infers biographical notes about its author from the context given in the book. Therefore the article title should be the book name, and the author should be a redirect. This will require some editing of the text if the move is approved. A similar case appeared at Sun Tzu (mathematician) whose sparse biographical data was merged with his work The Mathematical Classic of Sunzi. — JFGtalk 10:34, 7 January 2017 (UTC) --Relisting.JudgeRM(talk to me) 18:40, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Comment I see where you coming from, but the Sunzi situation is a little different: "Sunzi" is ambiguous, "Pomponius Mela" isn't. NGram shows more hits for the man than the book. Timmyshin (talk) 05:12, 16 January 2017 (UTC)