Talk:Priscus (gladiator)

Ancient Rome Comments

The first paragraph is good: a concise summary of Priscus's life that nails what seems to be the important points.

Beyond the first paragraph, well, all the other stuff shouldn't be here. There are separate articles on Titus and gladiators for a reason; you do not need to summarize their importance here. The article should focus solely on Priscus. The rationale for context, importance of gladiators and Titus's dealings in his life should be interwoven into the text; the current set up is awkward and jarring to read

I suggest eliminating each of the sections, then expanding on the first paragraph to include (in abbreviated/summarized form) all of that removed information that directly relates to Priscus. There's no real need for separate headings in this article, just go with a multiple paragraph format. Finally, when your edits are done, get rid of the stub tag.

Also, cite with footnotes. This is the preferred method of citation that Professor Strong wants us to use. You can find a how-to guide here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Footnotes

199.74.101.136 02:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC) Sam Hobbie

I agree with what has been said so far here: the multiple headings in this article do make it hard to read. I feel when I read the "Role of Priscus" section that I have to scroll back up to the poem to get the significance.

Beyond changing the format into multiple paragraphs, I'm left a little curious about Priscus's background. Under what circumstances did he become a gladiator? I would think that if Titus was worried about image, he would make sure Martial wrote about somebody from admirable roots. If you can find this info, that'd be interesting.

Otherwise, good job. This is well-sourced and written in an easy-to-understand, conversational tone.

Ryan Reeh 16:37, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

More comments

Good article, but many of the subjects discussed stray from the focus of the article, Priscus. The first paragraph was good and focuses on Priscus. I also liked the text of the poem included in the article, but is it possible to make a link to the text online?

I agree with sam that the sections about Titus and Gladiators are unecessary and should be removed, or somehow better integrated with the section about Priscus. I understand that your only primary source is the poem which may be somewhat limited in information about Priscus, but when reading the article I found myself wondering what the article was really about, Priscus? or the poem itself? Alot of this article seemed to be more like an analysis of the poem than a biography about Priscus.

You also dont need to mention, "The poem detailing Priscus and Verus' battle shows a few things." since it is already understood that the poem is your primary source of information. I also agree that footnotes should be used here. Other than that, good article. Erikofferman 03:32, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Very good summary and use of sources; you almost got a zero because you hadn't emailed the URL to any of us, however. Be grateful we did a search for your article!