![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Marble slab of Pharasmanes was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 10 January 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Fasti Ostienses. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
JLee916. Peer reviewers:
Samlederman.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 21:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
"Although the fragments of the Fasti Ostienses date over the span of two centuries, only three months of the inscriptions were comprehensible." -- This doesn't make sense. While the Fasti Ostienses is lacunose, far more than "three months" of this inscription is readable. I've read this primary source, & can attest to that fact. For example, the portion listing the consuls from AD 14 to 20 is complete, & was the subject of an article by a renouned Classicist, Ronald Syme -- "The Early Tiberian Consuls", Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, 30 (1981), pp. 189-202. To be honest if this wasn't the subject of a class assignment, since I can't evaluate the source cited, I'd remove these contributions & re-write it based on my own familiarity with the document. -- llywrch ( talk) 22:37, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Things I've notices upon first reading
Review
Many portions of this article could be removed wholesale. 'Description' and 'Context of early Ostia' are redundant as Descriptions is covered better in 'Content' and 'Context' is not relevant. Get rid of complex sentences that are in any way subjective or even hint at a mood or tone. Just the facts delivered uncompromised by excessive prose.
But this is better than most articles, and you have a good subject that can be expanded upon. Good work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samlederman ( talk • contribs) 04:56, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Marble slab of Pharasmanes was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 10 January 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Fasti Ostienses. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
JLee916. Peer reviewers:
Samlederman.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 21:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
"Although the fragments of the Fasti Ostienses date over the span of two centuries, only three months of the inscriptions were comprehensible." -- This doesn't make sense. While the Fasti Ostienses is lacunose, far more than "three months" of this inscription is readable. I've read this primary source, & can attest to that fact. For example, the portion listing the consuls from AD 14 to 20 is complete, & was the subject of an article by a renouned Classicist, Ronald Syme -- "The Early Tiberian Consuls", Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, 30 (1981), pp. 189-202. To be honest if this wasn't the subject of a class assignment, since I can't evaluate the source cited, I'd remove these contributions & re-write it based on my own familiarity with the document. -- llywrch ( talk) 22:37, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Things I've notices upon first reading
Review
Many portions of this article could be removed wholesale. 'Description' and 'Context of early Ostia' are redundant as Descriptions is covered better in 'Content' and 'Context' is not relevant. Get rid of complex sentences that are in any way subjective or even hint at a mood or tone. Just the facts delivered uncompromised by excessive prose.
But this is better than most articles, and you have a good subject that can be expanded upon. Good work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samlederman ( talk • contribs) 04:56, 31 July 2017 (UTC)