Talk:Romano-Germanic culture/Arc2

Main talk page | Archive 1 | Archive 2

This is an archived talk page. Please do not edit it.

Name change

I have moved the article from Romano German to Romano-German culture. I am still disappointed in it and will propose deletion if there are not substantial improvements within 24 hours. -- Rob C (Alarob) 14:00, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well Rob, if you hate the article that much, and if it bothers you that much, then I guess you should propose it be deleted. I dont want to cause you pain over the article (seems like you have suffered enough). The Romano German culture is a culture that should be featured in wiki, perhaps my english abilities have put a damper on the article, and now its almost an obsession for you to have it deleted...Do you think the Romano German culture is not important enough for wiki? It cant be, because wiki already has Romano British, and Roman Gaul like I have stated before. I cant really see anything wrong with the article, but im no english expert. I can say though

It begins with a clear definition of what Romano German culture is.

Gives a brief history of German/Roman relations

Goes into briefly the Holy Roman Empire

Lists reliable resources

Again Rob, I must say it really, really does feel, and look like you have a personal issue with the article, let it go or help improve it! We both agree its history, and significant to european culture today, no? --ProfMozart 02:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't go as far as saying that Rob has a personal issue with this article. He made a simple request for improvement to be made and since the article hasn't been improved enough to meet standards in the time frame Rob gave you hence his disappointment and his deletion proposal since you have been given plenty of time and chances to improve the article. Although I would say a few editors are probably getting tired of having to constantly try to explain to you why this article isn't notable or you personally bending the meaning of people's comments into your own views on what we say. So I will try to explain this clearly in one paragraph all together.

This article doesn't assert notability through sources that are reliable by Wikipedia standards not your standards or that can be verified as the main references of this article are to poets or books that have yet to be found by anyone else. Second the article conflicts with other articles and facts in the other articles and third the article doesn't follow proper Wikipedia style and format. Xtreme racer 21:15, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correction re sources: The poets and undiscoverable author were in the last version of this article. This one actually cites a few titles about the Holy Roman Empire in the early modern period -- which is not the era supposedly covered by the article. No specific reference is made to the sources. I can't help thinking that in both cases the sources were only put there to impress us with their authority and perhaps deflect criticism. -- Rob C (Alarob) 13:15, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poets?

look at the refrences? do you see poets?? Listen I dont even care anymore, everybody knows what going on here. Extreme, and Rob do nothing but repeat themselves, and definitly have a personal thing with the article. Well I't doesnt matter cause I'm not coming to wiki anymore I dont have time for this. I tryed to add an important article, and people who do nothing but sit on there hig horse judging it, keep trying to have it deleted, and dont try to help improve it. Other editors have stated that the article needs to be here, but its as if some "editors" dont even take that into consideration. So either way it dont matter, do whatever you guys want i dont want to argue about it.

So adios dont bother messageing me again, cause im not gonna be around, have fun taking knowledge from people who could have benifited from this article. --ProfMozart 02:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Roman-german culture in german language

Hello, i don't know the combination of Romano-German culture in german. In german the term roman-german will be used by historicians only for the emperors and kings of the Holy Roman Empire to avoid confusion between the antique roman emperors on the one side and the german emperors of the 19. century on the other side. Sometimes also will be used the term romao-german empire, but in core it is the same meaning.

But i have never read about romano-german culture for the time of Holy Roman Empire. The culture in the Empire will be only described as german or franconian-german (my translation for fränkisch-germanisch, i hope you understand what i mean) for the early empire, nothing else. But i don't know if this term is used outside of german languange.

For the time of romans in todays germany or middleeurope i think only the term roman culture will be used, but antique or late-antique history is not my part .

Greetings from germany --Finanzer 23:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC) P.S. And in article are some errors. Charlemagne is NOT the begin of Holy Roman Empire, but the begin of the Frankish Empire. There is a great difference between these two empires. And the emperors called never self as romano-german, they was only roman emperors. The term romano-german is modern, how i wrote above. See also de:Römisch-deutscher Kaiser[reply]

Greeting Finanzer, the article never says Charlemange was Holy Roman Emperor, it just says he was crowned Augustus by the pope.--63.3.13.131 06:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats true, but the sentences suggest that is so. There is nothing written that the emperors stands in tradition of charlemagne an his ideas or something else. The emperor who is mentioned is charlemagne. A normal reader must think that charlemagne was the first emperor of Holy Roman Empire. --Finanzer 22:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, Charlemange was not the first HRE, I believe it was Otto II. But didnt the pope crown him King of the Romans? Wouldnt that suggest that his kingdom was Roman, or the populace 300 years later still considered themselves Roman... I dont know, and I have always been confused by the name of the Holy Roman Empire. --Sir Kindle 00:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And I also wanted to comment on that reference to Impress Irene offering herself in marraige to Charlemange. It turns out she offered her son to Charlemanges daughter, but later changed her mind, even though her son wanted to go through with it. --Sir Kindle 06:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Otto III First Holy Roman Emperor

Otto attempted to revive the glory and power of ancient Rome with himself at the head of a theocratic state. In 996, he came to the aid of Pope John XV at the pope's request to put down the rebellion of the Roman nobleman Crescentius II. He was declared King of the Lombards at Pavia, but failed to reach Rome before the Pope died. Once in Rome, he engineered the election of his cousin Bruno of Carinthia as Pope Gregory V, the first German pope. The new pontiff crowned Otto emperor on May 21, 996, in Rome. Here his main advisors were two of the main characters of this age, his tutor Gerbert of Aurillac and the bishop Adalbert of Prague. Together with these two visionary men, influenced by the Roman ruins and perhaps by his Byzantine mother, Otto devised a dream of restoration of a universal Empire formed by the union of the Papacy, Byzantium and Rome. He also introduced some court customs in Greek.

Otto made Rome the administrative center of his empire and revived elaborate Roman customs and Byzantine court ceremonies. He took the titles "the servant of Jesus Christ," "the servant of the apostles", and "emperor of the world". When Gregory V mysteriously died in 999, Otto arranged for Gerbert to be elected pope as Sylvester II. The use of this papal name was not casual: it recalled the first pope of this name, who had allegedly created the "Christian empire" together with Constantine the Great. Otto therefore was to be seen as the ideal successor to Constantine in the task of reunifying the Roman Empire.

Taken From: Otto III, wikipedia. --Sir Kindle 06:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is about the construction of Otto's political legitimacy -- a tenth-century German ruler with aspirations to unite the Christian world, east and west. Roman and Greek heritage seem to count almost equally, especially given Otto's lineage. On the subject of Romano-German culture this information seems tangential, and also a bit late in time. As Finanzer pointed out, the Holy Roman Empire really is a separate topic from the history and culture of Roman-influenced Germanic peoples. So what is this article actually about? Is it supposed to suggest that the Germanic people were primitive folk who hardly changed at all in nine hundred years, and who owed their HRE culture to the Romans? I don't buy it. -- Rob C (Alarob) 02:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose the article is about Roman-influenced Germanic peoples. Well that how it kind of starts off. But I guess the question is how did Roman-influenced Germanic peoples influence the HRE culturaly, or in any other way for that matter. Is the HRE section there to show us what happened to these people, or how they evolved?

or

Like Finanzer said, in German, the term Romano German means emperors of th HRE, and thats why the HRE section has to be there. Would Romano German mean the children of the Romans and Germans who "intermarried"? --Sir Kindle 03:18, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Main talk page | Archive 1 | Archive 2