Talk:Abolla

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article incorporates content from Smith's A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, a publication in the public domain.

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Greece      (Rated Stub-Class) Greece Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece. If you would like to participate, you can improve Abolla, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ. Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. (comments) Mid This article has been rated as a Mid priority article Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome     (Rated Stub-Class) 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. Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale. Mid This article is on a subject of Mid-importance within classical antiquity. Fashion WikiProject     (Rated Stub-Class) Fashion Portal This article is within the scope of the Fashion WikiProject. Please work to improve this article, or visit our project page to find other ways of helping. Thanks! Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale. Mid This article is on a subject of Mid-importance within fashion. It is requested that one or more images be included in this article to improve its quality. Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] Comments

I've removed the references here because they were copied blindly from Smith. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but when the person who copies doesn't bother to check the references, there can be errors, as in this case (references to Juvenalius vi 75 instead of iii115). Ori Redler 15:52, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Weird. All those removed references were fine; therefore the only "correction" made — other than wholesale deletions of good refs — is wrong ("iii115"; IV.75 was right). Also, "Juvenalius" is hardly Juvenal's Latin name. This is a perfect example of Wikipedia dummification. Someone put up the Smith's article, which is good, and with several good references to the primary sources — and by the miracle of editing, most of the refs have been removed, and the one remaining one has been at the mercy, at least once, and doubtless again, of a misguided editor. Bill 01:20, 7 April 2007 (UTC)