Talk:Cultural depictions of Julius Caesar

Fair use rationale for Image:AxCaesar.gif

Image:AxCaesar.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Stop removing spurious quote section

It's a depiction of Julius Caesar in popular culture. What's the issue here? --Nicknack009 (talk) 16:41, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Pretty simple... a false depiction of Julius Caesar in a spam email doesn't make it a cultural depiction, so that's why it should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.84.23 (talk) 20:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

But a false depiction of Julius Caesar in a political cartoon and a party convention speech is a cultural depiction and is notable enough to appear in this article. Your persistent removal of valid content is vandalism, nothing less. Stop it now. --Nicknack009 (talk) 21:02, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

It was a Democratic fundraising concert that she gave the speech and misattributed the quote to William Shakespeare, presumably she thought it was from his play Julius Caesar. Later on she acknowledged her mistake, being duped by an internet hoax. Anyways, she didn't say Caesar said it, she was extensively quoting Shakespeare and making remarks about him, not Caesar. So she relented after finding out the quote is a hoax... this doesn't qualify as a cultural depiction of Julius Caesar. Please see details in the Washington Post article [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.84.23 (talk) 02:11, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Shaespeare's play Julius Caesar is precisely the sort of thing this article is about, so it doesn't matter whether it was believed to have been said by Caesar himself or believed to have come from the play. It is culturally significant, notable, and appropriate to this article. I have given you three vandalism warnings. Remove this material once more and I will nominate you to be blocked from editing. --Nicknack009 (talk) 09:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Streisand did not specifically mention the play Julius Caesar, it was my presumption that she thought it was from Julius Caesar; she could have thought it was from one of his other plays or poems, who knows. What she actually said was: "So, in the words of William Shakespeare, 'Beware the leader...[spurious quote]'" which afterwards she back-pedaled on the authoring of and credited an unkown author: "...Whoever wrote it is damn talented. I hope he's writing his own play."

Score count is: Internet Hoax:1 Barbara Streisand:0

OK, joking aside, she said something about Shakespeare writing that 400 years ago is relevant to today. She did not say Caesar said it, nor have I found any reference to her saying anything about the play Julius Caesar. So she spoke at length about Shakespeare and quoted him, including the spurious quote. She thought Shakespeare made the quote about Caesar, and just as well, she did not depict Caesar actually saying the quote. Where's the cultural depiction of Caesar here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.84.23 (talk) 04:58, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you even understand the definition of the words "culture" and "depiction"? This is not an article about the real Julius Caesar and the things he said and did. This is an article about the way he has been used as a character, and image or an ideal in human culture. Streisand took the quote from a political cartoon by Paul Conrad, in which it was specifically attributed to Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, complete with a cartoon drawing of Caesar. So there's an artistic depiction of Caesar, and a reference to a dramatic depiction of him. Your justifications of your repeated destructive edits don't even count as pedantry, because they're wrong. --Nicknack009 (talk) 11:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes thanks, the article has many examples of cultural depictions, I got it. I had the impression you thought Streisand's speech was more culturally significant in this context. According to the Snopes article the hoax has been on the internet since Dec. 2001 which predates the cartoon and speech by 9-10 months, so Paul Conrad was also duped. You're wrong about the cartoon. It does not attribute any play by Shakespeare, it only attributes Shakespeare himself; and neither is the cartoon of Julius Caesar, it is a caricature of George W. Bush wearing a toga, laurel wreath, and sword in hand. Indeed the spurious quote is there. But the only Caesar reference in the quote - "And I am Caesar" - has some ambiguity. It may refer to Julius Caesar, or any of the Caesars who held the imperial title Caesar. The ambiguous "Caesar" is only a puppet for the convenience of the quote, and a sloppy one at that. It's ambiguous enough that it could be Caesar Augustus saying the quote in Shakespeare's other play Antony_and_Cleopatra. Hoaxes like this one have little need for accuracy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.84.23 (talk) 10:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Sign your posts, or better yet, get yourself a username. It doesn't matter that Streisand was duped, or Conrad was duped. I'm also not interested singling out one particular instance as the "culturally significant" one. The whole phenomenon is culturally significant, and Streisand's speech and Conrad's cartoon are examples of its significance. Taken as a whole - the internet circulation as well as the speech and the cartoon - the phenomenon clearly concerns Julius Caesar. I really have no idea what you're trying to achieve here. It is accurate, it is notable and it fits the scope of the article. It should stay. --Nicknack009 (talk) 11:35, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

We'll have to agree to disagreee then. It's already in the Julius Caesar Misattributed Quotes section of the Wikiquotes article, just a quick mention of the hoax and a link to the wikiquote page should suffice. Perhaps more consensus is needed on this issue of including the hoax content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.84.23 (talk) 07:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

This is just vandalism. Stop it. --Nicknack009 (talk) 11:49, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Another opinion: First this is a disagreement between two editors and is on the verge of an edit war. I do not believe it is not appropriate to handle this by issuing vandalism warnings. Stubbornness is not vandalism. The ownership policy and three-revert rule also apply. I suggest following the suggestions in the Dispute resolution to resolve this. Personally, I tend to agree with the removal of this material. There are other pages in Wikipedia that discuss internet hoaxes and I don't believe we should include incorrect (hoax) material in mainstream article, just to follow it with at statement that it's not true. -- Tcncv (talk) 06:00, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I diagree. This is culturally significant, is still all over the internet, and readers deserve to be given the accurate information, otherwise, what is an encyclopedia for? Secondly, User:206.174.84.23's history includes nothing but destructive edits, all to this article. --Nicknack009 (talk) 11:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Three questions should be asked of anyone who wants to delete material from an article: (1) is it accurate? (2) is it notable? and (c) does it fit the scope of the article? In this case the answer to all three questions is yes. The deleted material should be restored forthwith. I will not do it myself for fear of being accused of "edit warring" again, so I am requesting another editor do it. --Nicknack009 (talk) 12:23, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking that this material would be a better fit to the WikiQuote project. When I looked, I found that many of the people pages had sections for misattributed quotes - Ben Franklin, Mark Twain, and Winston_Churchill, to name a few. In particular, the Julius Ceasar page has a Misattributed Quotes section that already contains the "drums of war" quote. And by the way, your contributions are appreciated. My opinion is just one small voice. I suggest you solicit other opinions if you'd like to pursue this further. -- Tcncv (talk) 14:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Why not just have a sentence on the internet hoax and link it to Julius Caesar's Misattributed Quotes section?206.174.84.23 (talk) 11:28, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Art

Why aren't there any paintings listed? I think there might be a few paintings with Caesar in them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.60.11.41 (talk) 14:12, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

This article is far behind and needs an update

Where is the mention of the HBO-BBC series "Rome"?--Amadscientist (talk) 00:53, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Found it. It was incorrectly added.--Amadscientist (talk) 00:55, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Re-write into prose

The article is just a bunch of lists and not adequate at that, there is nothing mentioned of artistic rendering, like busts and paintings.--Amadscientist (talk) 01:00, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

The Arles bust

There is no consensus among scholars that the Arles bust is Caesar. (Some think it's more likely to be Claudius, or just some dude.) Zanker and Beard, for instance, say not. This article should not affirm it as such; see Arles portrait bust. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:48, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Tusculum Portrait

Shouldn't there be an article or at least a section on the tusculum portrait somwhere? Rsercher (talk) 19:53, 14 June 2011 (UTC)