Talk:Roman lead pipe inscription

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of the WikiProject for Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors who write Wikipedia's Classics articles. 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Typography (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Typography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Typography 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
 

Copy edit and comments[edit]

I've just done a light copy edit of this article. Some comments:

  • I expanded the phrase "80,000 t" to "80,000 tonnes"; is this the correct unit (that is, metric tons)?
  • The 'controversy' about the method of creating the inscriptions is discussed at greater length than might be warranted by a short article such as this.
  •  I would be interested in knowing more about the content of the inscriptions; could you add some samples perhaps? This would also offset the apparent disparity in weight given to the controversy section.

This was an unexpectedly interesting article to read. Many thanks. –Syncategoremata (talk) 11:07, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks for your much appreciated copy edit.
  1. Yes, they are metric tons (=t).
  2. It's discussed at greater length, because this is basically intended as a typography article. However, that does not bar it from being expanded someday, but I don't have the scholarly material for that.
  3. I will soon include a photo of such an inscription from Roman Chester, UK. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 12:50, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
I hadn't twigged that this was a typography article, though that does explain why I found it so interesting. I hope my contribution has helped and I look forward to seeing the photo.
All the best. –Syncategoremata (talk) 13:00, 17 April 2010 (UTC)