Talk:Prostitution in ancient Rome
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Prostitution in ancient Rome article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
 | The contents of the Meretrix page were merged into Prostitution in ancient Rome on 23 June 2018. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Problems with Other locations
editThe tone in the large middle section of #Other locations is very casual, there's a lot of personal interpretation by whoever wrote it and most notes are to primary sources. It uncritically refers to Paul the Deacon. Smells of someone's OR. 195.169.52.30 (talk) 10:31, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
What do you mean by "it uncritically refers to Paul the Deacon"? And why presume it's original research? Evidently, someone decided to copy the source, along with its idiosyncracies, and justify the text using at least some of the same primary sources referred to by the editor of the original, well over 100 years ago. Like it or not (and I don't like it at all), the source has already been checked. It's a legitimate use, apart from failure to credit the source and some surplus flourishes, most of which came with the text and can be removed. Rather than tag sections, you might find a thorough search pays off. For the original (or rather, an ebook of the original, word for word, including that give-away "we") see the Gutenberg edition of Petronius Arbiter - The Satyricon — Volume 06: Editor's Notes. [1] The work is in the Public Domain. Copyright (C) 2001, 2002 by Michael S. Hart. Haploidavey (talk) 13:08, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
See talk page discussion around 2009 (above) on this very issue, and the evaluation of commentary as very outdated indeed. Haploidavey (talk) 16:33, 3 January 2023 (UTC)