Talk:Latin kings of Alba Longa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome. To participate, improve this article or visit the project page for more information.

[edit] List

I think this page should be turned into a list, and the page of the Latin Kings gang should instead be the page reached by searching for "Latin kings." The gang article would be entirely more appropriate as it is a more popular search result when looking for "Latin kings." I did a basic "Google search" for the term, and did not hit a page on the kings of yore for quite a few pages. Thoughts ideas? --I Write Stuff (talk) 00:26, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree that having two pages, one entitled "Latin Kings" and the other "Latin kings", about two totally different subjects, is confusing. Perhaps this page could be renamed "Latin kings of Alba Longa", and "Latin kings" would then redirect to "Latin Kings" (the gang), and the disambiguation page would be maintained with references to the three articles, much the same as is the case now, except that the page on the kings of yore would be, as I repeat, "Latin kings of Alba Longa". However, I think the corresponding template is best left alone as is. Pasquale (talk) 14:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a suitable middle ground, I do not know how to make a disambiguation page however. Perhaps we should give it more time to see if anyone else would like to chime in, or if you would prefer to be bold, make any changes possible. --I Write Stuff (talk) 16:24, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A reservation

Well, it looks like User:Neddyseagoon made the decision for everyone. Had he allowed for a discussion, I would have pointed out that the ancient Romans did not consider these kings mythological, but historical. They may, of course, be entirely or largely mythological, but a more appropriate term may be legendary. The way I understand these terms, a legendary character may have some historical foundation, while a mythological character usually doesn't. Pasquale (talk) 14:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, sorry to jump the gun, and a wholly valid point. But surely the main criteria for a terminology should be how they are viewed now rather than then? Neddyseagoon - talk 14:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)