Talk:Nova Roma
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
How can an article about a serious effort to study and revive a culture and religion at the heart of modern western culture lack "notablility"? Every character in "Sailor Moon" has an article (e.g. Mamoru_Chiba) and I daresay the study of Roman religion and culture is rather more "notable" than any individual character from "Sailor Moon". Whogue 11:11, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- But Nova Roma isn't a study of Roman religion and culture, it's a micronation. I don't expect an article written about me because I picked up a copy of Wheelock's Latin from a nearby bookstore. Slac speak up! 09:56, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well that's specious reasoning if ever I've seen it. There's no reason why a micronation can't be based on a study of Roman religion and culture if that's what the members want. --Centauri 10:56, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with that at all: but the proposition that studying Roman religion and culture is what makes it notable I emphatically reject. Slac speak up! 11:45, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- What makes it "notable" is the fact it has 2500 members in a dozen or so countries, which makes it the biggest Roman-themed recreationist organiszation in the world, readily comparable to such organizations as the Society for Creative Anachronism. --Centauri 22:36, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with that at all: but the proposition that studying Roman religion and culture is what makes it notable I emphatically reject. Slac speak up! 11:45, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well that's specious reasoning if ever I've seen it. There's no reason why a micronation can't be based on a study of Roman religion and culture if that's what the members want. --Centauri 10:56, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
I see in the proposed criteria for notability of organizations:
Criteria For Organizations
- 1. Organizations are usually notable if the scope of activities are national or international in scale and information can be verified by a third party source.
[SNIP]
Assertion of notability Notability can be asserted for organizatons through:
- 1. Inclusion in third party published materials.
It seems to me that we have established that Nova Roma, whatever else it is, is international in scope and is cited by reliable third parties. Can we lay the notablility issue to rest? Whogue 10:05, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
- I'd agree with that. In any case "notability" is not a valid inclusion criteria. It's merely a proposal at this stage. Verifiability carries far more weight. --Centauri 10:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, as I said, "...the proposed criteria...". But really I was just responding to the content of the tag on this article. It says "...please expand the article to establish its notability, citing reliable sources". So I'm suggesting that the specific objection mentioned has been dealt with enough to dismiss the tag and let work on this article proceed without categorizing it as "Wikipedia articles with topics of unclear importance".
- I'd suggest that the "reliable external sources" aspect needs to be stressed a bit more and the article needs to be better referenced. This was my motivation in appending the tag rather than nominating it for deletion. Slac speak up! 21:53, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia and others cite Nova Roma as a source
Nova Roma is cited by http://www.religioustolerance.org/ as a source on the topic of pagan reconstructionism. Nova Roma is also cited under "External links" in Polytheistic_Reconstructionism. It is simply a fact that there is a reconstructionist movement and reconstruction of the Religio Romana is mainly centered in Nova Roma and www.religioromana.net . The Nova Roma wiki also contains original work by recognized classisists. This is sufficient, IMO, to show that Nova Roma is taken seriously both as an authority on the Religio Romana and as a valid participant in the academic community. Whogue 13:02, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Recruitment tent photo
I'm not sure I understand the reason that the "recruitment tent" photo was removed. It nicely illustrated the "Live events" section. Would a photo of some military re-enactors be better? I hope it was not removed simply because it underlines the fact that Nova Roma is not exclusively internet-based (which is why, I suspect, it was included). Whogue 09:12, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
