This user may have left Wikipedia. Appietas has not edited Wikipedia since 29 March 2012. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.
Welcome!
Hello, Appietas, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place ((helpme)) before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Red Director05:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've just removed some stuff from the beginning of the article Publius Clodius Pulcher - it really wasn't appropriate there, as I say in my edit summary (and please start using edit summaries), you need to read WP:LEAD. In fact, you really need to read the Manual of Style and WP:How to write a great article. Plus, with respect, WP:OR. You obviously know a great deal about Roman history but I think you need some help in communicating it within Wikipedia guidelines and polices. Anyway, I think you will make a better editor if you read at least some of my suggestions -- let me know what you think after you've read them. Thanks. dougweller (talk) 21:15, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Doug
I'd agree I should be better informed on Wiki edit policies, and will read the pages you've indicated. However I think Clodius' importance merits rather more than a couple of lines introduction, and probably should include a short-list of his principal public offices, the dates of which are known and uncontroversial. I don't mind if my intro. blurb is removed, but someone should add something more substantial (the Wiki page says up to 4 paragraphs).
Additionally, it is certain that he was born 93 or earlier owing to his praetura candidacy for 53, and the intercalation of the pre-Julian calendar is also known exactly back to 57 BC, and therefore the exact Julian date of Clodius' death in December 53 BC is known. It is erroneous and misleading to equate pre-Julian calendar dates with dates in the Julian era BC. I don't see how persisting with known errors enhances the topic. See the good Wiki article Roman Calendar. . Appietas (talk) 22:59, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response. I've put back a para, slightly tweaked. The rest of the stuff, properly sourced, should go wherever it is most appropriate but I think it is too detailed for the lead. I think the para I put back might be sourced also, it's got opinion in it and by our polices/guidelines it has to be the opinion of a reliable source, right? [Appius Claudius Pulcher (consul 54 BC)]] has some similar problems. It reads bittily for a start, and again some of the stuff in the lead should be integrated into the article, so the prophecy of his death is in the appropriate place, etc. Look at some of the other articles to see how they handle the sort of lists of titles, etc -- obviously stuff needs to be accurate, sourced, etc but it also needs to look right, flow, whatever. I'm away tomorrow but when I come back I'll try to find some good models if there are any, that is! dougweller (talk) 19:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Getting into arguments over the exact date under the Julian or Gregorian calendar is useless and a colossal waste of time. Wikipedia is a general-purpose encyclopedia, not an academic publication. All of the information in historical articles should be the same as what you would find in an ordinary book, and the information should be relatively uncontroversial. The uselessness of this "debate" is personified in the arguments over Cicero's birthday. I don't care what website you can link to. No one knows for certain that Cicero was born on January 3 by any calendar. Whatever contemporary book this date was based off of has been transcribed countless times over the centuries by hundreds of scribes. And no one can pinpoint to absolute certainty, to the day, what that date translated to in another calendar. I don't care how certain your professor thinks he is. This is an utterly arcane science, and that type of precision is impossible. Maybe his calculations are right, maybe they aren't. That is a purely academic question, not an ordinary, uncontroversial fact that should be shown on Wikipedia. If most books say that an event occurred on a date, then that is the date we use. We don't use your own opinion based off of some obscure professor's calculations. RomanHistorian (talk) 00:29, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So say yourself. Full of error and assumption once more. What really matters in all this is your refusal to accept any reasonable compromise, e. g. Cicero born about January 106 BC, to which nobody could object. But beyond that, my removal of the terrible misinformation about Cicero not being Roman in the true sense, and the deep affect this had on his career. Which is bogus and seriously misleading nonsense. Additionally my rewrite cited the sources relevant both to himself, and his town. All of this likewise removed by yourself to resume the bogus tripe which is unsourced, because its fantasy. This is the way you operate, and it says all that needs to be said about what you are. . Appietas (talk) 10:23, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)
The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 15:53, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Many of your edits to Roman articles (such as Publius Clodius Pulcher and First Mithridatic War) make the articles extremely difficult to read. They are messy, disorganized and include a lot of material that is too specialized even for wikipedia. Quoting contemporary historians in the original Greek, for example, is by no means helpful. Almost no one on wikipedia can read Greek, and even fewer need that to learn about the topic. I think some of the information is useful, which is why I don't think the best option is to outright undo the edits. But these articles are nearly unreadable for the average reader, and someone needs to address this. RomanHistorian (talk) 00:17, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Mithridatic War pieces were virtually empty, so I threw in some stuff to edit properly later from various files I maintain. Obviously the Greek would not remain in a finished article, and I have proceeded differently in the 3rd Mith War article. However I can see its all going to be a colossal waste of time with a creature like yourself tracking down everything I write for removal while proudly holding fast to the significantly ill informed dribble included by yourself. Enough already. Don't pretend you're some positive influence. Just very creepy. .Appietas (talk) 10:31, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)
The December 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:57, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)
The January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:04, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009)
The February 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The March 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:53, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)
The April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:22, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)
The May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:05, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)
The June 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)
The July 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:44, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Appietas. I stumbled on your draft for this L. Valerius Flaccus with a great deal of relief, as I had been intending to work on such an article and now feel free of the responsbility. (I've done articles on his father and uncle, and the other L. Valerius Flaccus who was consul in 100 and princeps senatus in 86).
I wanted to ask you about your source on the three-man delegation to Transalpina. I recall reading about this mission, but I didn't know they were the ones responsible for bringing about the declaration of Ariovistus as Friend of the Roman People. Would it be asking too much of a favor to have you drop a note on my talk page about your sources for this particular point? You'd save me a lot of time and trouble for something I'm working on.
I'm really looking forward to reading the finished article, as what you have already clarifies some things I've been interested in with this figure. I wrote a hasty little article on Decimus Laelius, who prosecuted Flaccus; the secondary source I have there argues that Flaccus was known to be guilty, even though he had the influence to get himself acquitted, and that this is why he never advanced to the consulship — a failure that is otherwise hard to explain. This is M.C. Alexander, The Case for the Prosecution in the Ciceronian Era (2002), pp. 80–97, with a limited preview online through Google Books. This trial, as you no doubt know, attracts scholarly attention in part because of the light (or not) it sheds on Jewish relations with Rome. A worthwhile article on the subject is Anthony J. Marshall, “Flaccus and the Jews of Asia (Cicero Pro Flacco 28.67–69)," Phoenix 29 (1975) 139–154. Cynwolfe (talk) 06:22, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The August 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:01, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!
The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:16, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Appietas. I notice that you haven't worked on the article for Lucius Valerius Flaccus (praetor 63 BC) since June. I'm keen to get that posted, since I link to this figure often, and another editor has been going around changing my redlinks to Lucius Valerius Flaccus (praetor 63 BC) to link instead to the subsection of the Lucius Valerius Flaccus page, which is not what I would prefer. As I said above, I admire the work you've done on this article. I'm wondering whether you've gotten tired of it, or frustrated, or have no time to move ahead with it. If you feel like this is something you want to develop in your own distinctive way, and then post in its entirety, please let me know. I absolutely do not want to hijack your article, and I have plenty of other things to work on. If, however, you're at the point of saying "why did I ever start this?" and don't have plans to continue, I would be honored to finish the article for you, and would try to keep as closely to its spirit and outline as possible. I wrote the following articles on related Valerii Flacci, if you'd like to see whether or not my approach could serve your own: Lucius Valerius Flaccus (princeps senatus 86 BC), Gaius Valerius Flaccus (consul 93 BCE), Lucius Valerius Flaccus (suffect consul 86 BC). Also related articles on Decimus Laelius and C. Appuleius Decianus.
Oh, I also addressed an inquiry to the Help Desk regarding the proper etiquette here, a link to which I provide for the sake of transparency here. I will also email you, as suggested there. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's a pleasure to hear from you, and oddly enough, I was just thinking about this article again a day or two ago. I'm aware of some discussions you've had on talk pages, and completely understand what you said about contributing. I started writing articles to force myself to organize my research for fiction projects; I can only imagine the frustration if I were engaged in professional scholarship. Because modern English biographies don't exist for some of the minor figures I write about, I often find it difficult to produce any kind of coherent narrative without filling in the interpretive gaps. Or to put it another way, when you put the material together, certain connections emerge. I like your work because it was written by a thinking human, but the ideal here seems increasingly robotic, as if articles should be no more than mechanical lists of facts. Anything interesting or provocative must be purged.
I'm particularly interested in the Valerii Flacci of the 1st century BC, and their ability to flummox scholars who want to slot them into "optimates" or "populares"; like the Licinii Crassi, they call the categories into question. (Or maybe I just think that because I live in the U.S., where "political moderate" is a species facing extinction.) Also the connection between Gaius's governorship in Gaul, and his nephew Lucius's dealings with the Gauls in the late 60s, and why Lucius seems to have had nothing to do with Caesar, though in regard to Gaul and Caesar's intentions there, there's an obvious link through the Helvian Valerii that Caesar's at pains to point out by mentioning Gaius's grant of citizenship to the family. If your work becomes available, it would be very useful for me to read it. Cynwolfe (talk) 12:20, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.
If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)
The October 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XIV (November 2009)
The November 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:44, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)
The December 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:30, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:51, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open!
The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:53, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:15, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)
The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:00, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)
The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:19, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)
The June 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:38, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)
::I understood from our earlier discussion that you were disinclined to finish the Flaccus article. I'm thinking that with your permission, I'd like to move it to my own user space to work on it. If you've changed your mind, please feel free to move it back to yours. Cynwolfe (talk) 00:58, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
After I thought about it, I decided that a better course might be to edit it where it is, in your user space, and please feel free to revert it all. I want to make sure the eventual article's edit history properly credits your role in its creation. Cynwolfe (talk) 01:05, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIV (August 2010)
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:01, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! From your edits, it looks like you might be interested in ancient Dacia. Would you like to join the WikiProject Dacia? It is a project aimed to better organize and improve the quality and accuracy of the articles related to these topics. We need help expanding and reviewing many articles, and we also need more images. Your input is welcomed! Thanks and best regards!
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:02, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the project • what coordinators do) 08:36, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.