Talk:Laudatio Turiae

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

discussion for Laudatio Turiae

I think you did a great job providing content and information about Laudatio Turiae. My biggest suggestion would be to tweak the style of the article, i.e. make it more "encyclopaedia sounding." For the most part, the article does this, but there are some areas throughout that could be edited, such as the first part of the first sentence. Also, providing a brief introduction at the beginning of the article will go a long way in achieving that certain style. Once again, good job with the content. Cfrontz 19:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Neat, I learned about an epitaph. Here are a few suggestions: 1) I think the first line should be changed a bit. My guess is that in Latin, 'Laudatio Turiae' doesn't sound like a name, it's just that we're inexperienced with the language (it's all Greek to us, so to speak). I think it would go a long way toward achieving that encyclopedia style. 2) I feel like the 'Inscription' section could use some more beef. Obviously, you're not going to have answers to all these, but I figured I'd throw a couple ideas out: 180 lines seems really long for an inscription, is the length of this one special or is it typical of the time? How much of it do we have? What caused it to become scattered all over the place? Etc. 3) Small thing, if it were my article, I think I'd put the 'Inscription' part in the middle, with Identities after it (seeing as how the identities are kinda speculative anyway, and I feel like the main section is the inscription). It's definitely your call, but I might play with the order. --Matt Vickery

 You did a good job being concise and not including information that an encyclopedia wouldn’t. 
 New: Don’t forget to link key dates or people to other Wikipedia articles. Is there a reason it is in pieces all over Rome? Reconsider the punctuation before and after 180 lines. Perhaps parenthesis or hyphens would be more appropriate.  “The currently pieces” I think is just a typo.  Would “primary and first-hand” make more sense than “primary yet first-hand”? You might be able to clarify the sentence about what the wife does for her husband by changing “it ranged” to “ranging”. Semicolons introduce a list as you correctly identify, but they usually don’t have a verb, rather just the list, following them.  Maybe elaborate saying that the marriage is unusual because the men usually die first because they died in war. Should there be a period at the end of the third reference? I think it’s Wikistyle to include ISBN numbers with books.
 Restated: Another example as has been mentioned about the style might be that as this is an encyclopedia, stay objective.  You may want to think about changing “lovely yet heart-pounding” to something like affectionate.
 Food for thought: Is towards really a word???????
 Sorry so grammatically inclined. 

--Luke Olson I've tried doing this 10 times and it always looks different from everyone else's199.74.80.246 03:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)Luke Olson

You did a good job of assembling information from a variety of sources. However, you need to be much more careful about objectivity and check recent scholarship; there is a reason why most scholars do not believe this inscription is about the historical Turia, and this article ought to include that. A quote or two from the inscription or an image of the tombstone would also be very useful, and you do not explain its significance sufficiently.