User talk:M. Lucretius Agricola

From NovaRoma

Contents 1 NR articles 2 Proposed deletions 3 image uploads 4 copyvio? 5 images 6 Sources and Privacy? 6.1 Absentia 7 Year templates 7.1 Historical year templates 8 Fiction Category 9 Res gestae? 10 Template:AnnalsHeader

[edit] NR articles

please use the "(Nova Roma)" suffix on Nova Roma articles. I'll rename the new articles on Leges now.

thanks and vale, Marcus Octavius Germanicus 20:45, 14 March 2006 (CST)

[edit] Proposed deletions

The following pages have notes from some time ago saying that they are to be deleted. I'll list more here as I bump into them:

DONE *Immoderate greatness (with an asterisk)

DONE Amici Dignitatis (Nova Roma) (with two caps) -- Marius Peregrinus 01:12, 9 September 2007 (CEST)

[edit] image uploads

thanks for the images for the front page, these are excellent. But may I make a suggestion - more descriptive filenames? You can change the filename upon upload; instead of P1010101rdwb600.jpg, something like 'Clivus-scauri-ivconv-1-MLA.jpg' (including the photographer's initials at the end); this would be more memorable when seeing the filenames appearing in watchlists, recent changes, and while editing articles that link to it. Marcus Octavius Germanicus^(t) 17:32, 21 September 2006 (CDT)

No prob... is there a safe, easy way to change these, or shall I just "brute force" it? Agricola 02:48, 22 September 2006 (CDT)

the wiki doesn't provide a move feature for photos, alas. for the ones we have already, I don't think it's worth the bother to rename them, but new images should have good names. I just wanted to get some sort of scheme in place before the archive grew to several hundred pictures. Vale, Marcus Octavius Germanicus^(t) 08:03, 22 September 2006 (CDT).

[edit] copyvio?

Did we get a request to remove the calendar image?

I think Saturninus would probably be willing to let us use it, especially as we're selling those calendars from the site... seeing what it looks like can only help sales.

I prefer the modern calendar image for the Market Day (Nova Roma) article, as it demonstrates the mapping of ABC...G onto Sunday/Monday/etc. and thus effectively show how our chat day changes as the weeks progress.

Vale, Marcus Octavius Gracchus^(t) 09:48, 27 October 2006 (CDT)

Yes, we had a request. I'll forward it to you. Agricola 18:37, 27 October 2006 (CDT)

[edit] images

re -

please use descriptive filenames for the images, so we can find them by name later. thanks, Marcus Octavius Gracchus^(t) 21:45, 1 November 2006 (CST)

that is an old image. I just updated the meta info Agricola 02:51, 2 November 2006 (CST)

OK - sorry about that! Marcus Octavius Gracchus^(t) 06:53, 2 November 2006 (CST)

[edit] Sources and Privacy?

Re: Fimbria article: I've located my printed records. Most of the material, I believe, is public domain (leges, Forum posts, List messages and such). However, some of it consists of private e-mails and chatroom transcripts. What is the policy (do we have one?) on the use of such material as primary sources? If I sent the message, may I use it? If I was the recipient, would I need to obtain the sender's permission? What about partial quotes, as are usually included in a reply? (I'm going to ask Apollonius Cordus too.)

I do have some interesting texts on other matters: an early Album Civium listing the *tresfamiliae; the original Interregnum notice and some associated correspondence; a proposed Statement of Religious Tolerance. There'll be very much more once I retrieve my NR mail from my ancient laptop.

Still no Nota text. I have my testimony for the hearing, which I believe to have taken place in October-November of 2000. All activity related to the Nota was conducted on the [Censor_Nota] Yahoo List. That List still exists, but no one I've talked to has access. -- Marius Peregrinus 09:47, 13 August 2007 (CEST)

• Just found: The issue of the Nova Roma Eagle in which D Iunius Palladius Invictus (editor) and L Cornelius Sulla Felix (The Censor) tender a (somewhat biased) description of the Incident. Are back issues of the Eagle available on the site? If not, shall I read this one into the record, as they say in Congress? -- Marius Peregrinus 22:32, 14 August 2007 (CEST)

I *think* they are still available on the NR server. What was the issue date? Agricola 01:36, 15 August 2007 (CEST)

"Issue IV 2000" (direct quote from the masthead). It'd be good if it still was on-site somewhere; it'd save me some typing... In the meantime, I may summarize their comments. -- Marius Peregrinus 04:27, 15 August 2007 (CEST)

Sorry. Seems that back then it was print only. The Wayback machine has the website from 2000 and therein I find "Nova Roma: The Eagle, c/o Art McGrath,111 E. Allen St., Winooski, VT 05404" as the subscription address. Was he the editor back then, I wonder? Would he still have the files? Agricola 05:09, 15 August 2007 (CEST)

Art McGrath, rka Decimus Iunius Palladius Invictus? Yes, he was editor that year. Thus his editorial. -- Marius Peregrinus 05:48, 15 August 2007 (CEST)

I've just "read into the record" the entirety of Nova Roma Eagle, issue IV, 2000, plus a relevant excerpt from issue III, and notes on that year's Eagles in general.

More fun: a page just for the "chatroom precedent" cited by all subsequent censores as justification for denying Marius' name-change request, with quotes from the appropriate Eagles.

I'm working on linking everything to each other. Considering the number of new pages that will likely be needed to hold all my primary refs, should I maybe create a Category for "rixa Fimbriana" material? -- Marius Peregrinus 23:06, 27 August 2007 (CEST)

Everything should be in some cat. If we make a "rixa Fimbriana" cat, where should we put THAT? What I'm driving at is that this material is part of the larger story of Nova Roma, and for that we have Category:Nova_Roma_History. So I will create Category:Rixa Fimbriana (Nova Roma) inside that cat. Keep in mind that SOME of the documents may also belong to other categories. Agricola 03:53, 28 August 2007 (CEST)

[edit] Absentia

I am going in for surgery in mid-September. My life for the next few weeks, as for the last few months, will consist chiefly of preparation for this event. I will be basically unavailable (for at least a few months) after the end of August.

I think there's enough now in the Fimbria article for the reader to at least have an idea what the issues were and how it could have become so divisive as time progressed. I won't be up to any more major work on it for a while. However, I am gathering the more readily-available of my sources as time permits and assembling them on a "toy Wiki" that one of our sodales, P Nonius Severus, put together last year for other purposes. Anyone who wants a sneak-peek can find my raw materials and rough drafts at Ancient Ways: Talk:Fimbria Controversies (draft) and Ancient Ways: More raw material. -- Marius Peregrinus 21:15, 25 August 2007 (CEST)

[edit] Year templates

What happened to the year templates? They're formatting all weird. My article, pro exemplo, is divided by consular years, which used to display as big bold headers. The code to make them headers is still there...but the dates themselves are in the same style as the body of the text.

Something else I've noticed: It's been a long time since mousing over any part of a Roman date in an article yielded the little pop-up translation to the year CE. It worked when I got here... >({(:-| -- Marius Peregrinus 22:48, 10 September 2007 (CEST)

[edit] Historical year templates

Thanks for the note about the blank line; I think I've fixed them now. So how would we automate the task of filling in the historical consular dates? Would I need to prepare a list of the consular dates and corresponding years? If so, in what format?

- Cordus 19:05, 11 September 2007 (CEST)

Yes, a list or table. In the end we want to have every template on a line of a text file. (A spreadsheet can be a handy tool for making these.) Then we get a bot to do the drudge work of making the files themselves. I think OctaviusBot made the date templates. Agricola 12:10, 12 September 2007 (CEST)

[edit] Fiction Category

What sorts of works are being accepted for the new Category:Fiction? I write alternate history and historical fantasy m'self; I've a longish example of the latter on my personal Web site that I wouldn't mind sharing once I polish it up... -- Marius Peregrinus 22:13, 11 November 2007 (CET)

> About your own works of fiction, well, what should be done? I very much value your contributions on our history, but is fiction another thing?

I'm not sure I understand the question...? (Nothing new; I confuzzle easily.) >({(:-\

As a non-Citizen, I may not be entitled to contribute fictional works in any case. But "Life with the Legions" was my submission to the Ludi Apollinares one year (it didn't win); and the Sherwood story was written entirely within the period of my tenure here. That doesn't mean they have the "right" to appear; but it is why I feel okay about offering them.

Of course, they may not be appropriate, or quite what NR's looking for. You're the publishers; you have the right to make that determination. You can see them for yourself; both are on my personal Web site, The Roman Outpost (est'd 1995), in the "Creative Research" section. -- Marius Peregrinus 20:19, 13 November 2007 (CET)

I can also keep an eye out for fictional works already on the site so's I can put them in this Category when I find them. (Perfect job for a recovering fellow who's home all day, nonne?) >({|:-) -- Marius Peregrinus 18:29, 12 November 2007 (CET)

[edit] Res gestae?

I've actually accomplished a thing or two, both in Nova Roma (besides the Fuss <g>) and in the larger Roman world, before and afters. Would it be appropriate to include deeds, other than NR magistracies held, on my official bio page? Or a link to my personal Web site, the Roman Outpost? If so, where would they go, and is there a set format for them? -- Marius Peregrinus 23:30, 24 January 2008 (CET)

I think res gestae are fine, and can be found on some of the bio pages. It is slightly less than good form to edit one's bio though... Agricola 04:12, 25 January 2008 (CET)

Bene'st; I thought I'd seen them somewhere. But on editing my bio...if I didn't, who would? No one besides me has gone near the thing since Octavius wrote the stub. I agree that's not ideal; me flying solo on the Fimbria pages isn't ideal either. I'd have thought some of the "opposition" voices would have spoken up by now; in some places I was rather counting on it. But, short of recruiting a biographer or letting it rust, what are a "subject's" options? (sincere question, not trying to be a pain) -- Marius Peregrinus 05:50, 25 January 2008 (CET)

Good question. I wish I had an answer. Anyway, nobody is going to stop you, so be bold! Agricola 06:40, 25 January 2008 (CET)

[edit] Template:AnnalsHeader

I didn't get the chance to mention this before it got buried in the Recent Changes, but...it looks a little like a T-shirt pattern, don't you think? I liked the previous format better. Mea sententia... -- Marius Peregrinus 20:06, 23 February 2008 (CET)

I don't know word one about making/editing templates; my skills sort of tail off at saying "Purty" or "Not Purty"... But the new language bar idea falls firmly into the Purty category! Sometimes, simplicity is elegance. Bene factum! -- Marius Peregrinus 21:18, 24 February 2008 (CET)