Talk:Poena cullei

Poena cullei has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: March 15, 2014. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Poena cullei appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 22 March 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that if you killed your parents in ancient Rome, you might be sewn into a leather sack with a monkey, a rooster, a dog and a snake?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2014/March. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Poena cullei.

Wikipedia

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Poena cullei/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Royroydeb (talk · contribs) 09:55, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The lead is very short, it should be expanded. Undone

OK, I'll do that

"From several sources, the 19th century historian Theodor Mommsen compiled and described in detail"- reword. Done

Ok, I'll do that

When was that first person whipped? I mean date. Done

Hmm?? It is neither known nor relevant.

The animals can be linked. Done

You mean link on monkey? We do not know what sort of monkey was used, and it is a perfectly common word.

Who is Cicero? Done

Just about the most renowned politician, lawyer and author in 1BC, Late Republican Rome?

He should be linked. RRD13 (talk) 16:01, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RRD13 (talk) 09:55, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He is already linked in the section bearing his name. One link should be enough, don't you think?Arildnordby (talk) 17:04, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking on the review.Arildnordby (talk) 10:14, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What was the ritual? Provide some information about it. Done

That is what the article does, in several instantiations of it.

"600-700 years" please write the numerals in words, since the previous ones are mentioned in the said. Done

Nope.

Yes, it should be done for consistency.RRD13 (talk) 13:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DoneArildnordby (talk) 14:16, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"As can......"- please provide reference for this paragraph. Done

No reference needed beyond quoted text. This is NOT interpretation needing ref.

Reword the first sentence under possible antecedents section. Done

Why?

The sentence has become too big. RRD13 (talk) 13:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DOneArildnordby (talk) 14:16, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In brackets write who is Plutarch. Done

Why? He is linked.

What I meant is you should write "Roman historian Plutarch". RRD13 (talk) 13:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DoneArildnordby (talk) 14:16, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In the incident of Caius Villius, how can a man be shut up in a vessel or jar? They are not big for humans. Done

A "large jar" is the translation in the reference, in others, "vessel" is used.

Instead of "Donald C. Kyle (2012)", it should be "in 2012, Donald C.Kyle a abc"

Incorrect. Donald C. Kyle (2012) is the correct form of referring to a particular publication of Kyle, published in 2012. Changes to Kyle (2012), though.Arildnordby. (talk) 11:57, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mention the nationality of Cicero.

Done

What do you mean by "provincial" level? Done

A perfectly standard distinction between "central state level" and "provincial level". Today, we speak of "state level" vs. "municipal level", for example.

Again before Suetonius, write "the Roman historian Suetonius".

OK

In history, we write circa, not probably. Done

Nope. "probably" is weaker than "circa".

Who are the "many"?

Do not understand where you refer to

The word "many" sounds a bit vague in this context. You should mention like "many abcians/ many xyzians". RRD13 (talk) 13:46, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be "The penalty in the sack". Done

Wrong. "Penalty of the sack is the standard phrase, see, for example: https://www.google.com/search?hl=no&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=%22penalty+of+the+sack%22&tbs=,bkv:p&num=10#hl=no&q=%22penalty+of+the+sack%22&tbm=bks&tbs=bkv:p

RRD13 (talk) 09:15, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More comments to follow.Arildnordby (talk) 11:51, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The last sentence of the last section is uncited. Done

Sextus Roscius case extremely famous and uncontroversially true, but that last sentence definitely needed a direct link for further exploration.

The lead should be expanded.

I'll coming there.

I still do not understand WHERE in the text this "many" you refer to occur. Please give sectionArildnordby (talk) 14:04, 11 March 2014 (UTC) RRD13 (talk) 13:48, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The "many" is under the section named "Revival by Constantine the Great".

Done

RRD13 (talk) 05:04, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

THanks! I have changed vague "many" into "several", as well as added ref to a modern author effectively backing up the same view on obsoleteness of p.c up to the times of Constantine.Arildnordby (talk) 09:44, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That leaves only one thing undone that is expanding the lead. Here we can see that many references lack accessdate which should be put. RRD13 (talk) 04:16, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I expanded the lead in the "only way possible", namely to briefly describe the different stages in the historical application of the punishment. Thus, the lead is now a micro-article on its own, without the detailed referencing and quoting contained in main article.Arildnordby (talk) 12:54, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of accessdates is still left. Hope you solve it soon. RRD13 (talk) 13:02, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't it be sufficient to just add accesdates in the bibliographical section, rather than in the main text as well? After all, the links in the main text are just the same links as in the biblio, only page specification included?Arildnordby (talk) 13:07, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have added accesdates on biblio sectionArildnordby (talk) 13:22, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Leges regiae

May I suggest that the editor read leges regiae, he will gather important relevant information on the history of the poena cullei.01:43, 26 February 2016 (UTC)01:44, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Scotland

I believe this may have been practiced in parts of northern Scotland 16/17 century. Anyone have details or opinions? If not, I can try to draft something with references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wundermac (talk • contribs) 09:19, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Parricide

Wouldn't it be more appropriate to label this as matricide under the example of Publicius Malleolus? Desdinova (talk) 22:38, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on whether 'parricide' is thought to come from Latin pater (father) or parens (parent). On the face of it, the latter looks more likely, but the OED is unsure. Errantios (talk) 23:23, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Barrels

The illustration shows an option of drowning in a barrel. Could this be followed up? Errantios (talk) 23:35, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]