User talk:Coffeewhite

Regarding "Apollo Roman God"

Hi there, Coffeewhite. In regards to your essay on Apollo from the Roman standpoint, there's a number of reasons I, and several others, have edited the page. I read your edit summaries and the discussion page and I think you might be a little confused as to how to best get your material inserted.

Most importantly, the Roman view of Apollo is, in fact, covered on the main Apollo Page. Click this link to head to that section. If you feel that that section of the page is lacking, you would be better served to modify the primary article, rather than splitting it off into a seperate section. Especially since the Romans' Apollo was essentially an adoption of the Greek Apollo, adding an additional article is an example of a no-no on wikipedia, known as Content Forking. Content forking is undesirable because it makes it difficult to come to true consensus, and also because it prevents our editors from making sure that relevant information gets added to all the articles on a topic.

Incidentally, the Romans never were really sure how to do a Sun god, see Mithraic Mysteries for another incarnation of the Sun God in ancient Rome.

I think you can probably offer wikipedia some very helpful assistance, but I'd also recommend you hop over to some of the "how to" stuff that's out there, just so you can get your bearings and make sure we don't step on your toes too much. The first place to start would be right here, the Wikipedia Welcome Page. I'd also recomment you click over to the Manual of style so you can learn a little on how we like to have information added. Thanks for being persistant, and please don't take our modifications of your work as something personal, we're just trying to follow the policies that the wiki community has decided are the way to make the best possible encyclopedia.

I'll leave your article on Apollo Roman God up for another day or so if you'd like to put the redirect back in again, then it will likely be changed back to a redirect to the primary Apollo article. Good luck and happy editing! CredoFromStart ^talk 13:41, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. I'll respond to your note on my page a little here. First of all, I don't have a negative attitude towards the Romans, or the Greeks, or the Macedonians or anyone from Western antiquity. I'm really not that interested in Classical history beyond basic knowledge. What I AM interested in is keeping the wiki clean.

As far as having the article locked, it was put into what's called "semi-protected" mode. In semi-protect, anonymous users cannot edit the article, and neither can newly registered accounts. This is to prevent vandalism from occuring - people putting in nonsense or swearing for no reason, that kind of thing. By the time you read this note you should have had your account long enough that you can now edit the article. I will warn you that trying to put in uncited material or stuff that goes against the manual of style will probably be deleted again, although not by me.

Another suggestion would be to use the Apollo discussion page to air your concerns. Two of the five wikiprojects that have staked a claim on Apollo ( Wikiproject Classical Greece and Rome and Wikiproject Mythology) are known for their accuracy and attention to detail. They can probably give you reasons for why the content looks like it does.

One last note, if you want to leave me a message again, please to it here at this link to my talk page, rather than on my main user page. That way I get a note telling me you want to talk to me, rather than having to wait until I stumble across your posting. Either way, good luck. CredoFromStart ^talk 13:41, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Roman Names

You'll have to take that one up on the discussion page. I'm not a regular editor of the Apollo article. The edit summary by the reverter indicates that it's unnecessary, but I'm not one to make a judgement call on that. CredoFromStart ^talk 21:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 21:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 2008

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thank you.

In addition, I suggest you read the Manual of Style with regard to the BC/BCE & AD/CE matter, noting particularly the statements "Either CE and BCE or AD and BC can be used. … It is inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor to change from one style to another unless there is some substantial reason for the change." Please don't change the estblished style in the article Apollo again. Deor (talk) 21:59, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I changed this is because simply he was a Roman and Greek and Italy and Greece use the AD and BC system is not a substantial reason for the change you made. Also, with regard to the addition of names of Roman gods, your changes made the article inaccurate. For instance, you changed "Apollo is the son of Zeus and Leto, and has a twin sister, the chaste huntress Artemis" to "Apollo is the son of Zeus (Jupiter) and Leto, and has a twin sister, the chaste huntress Artemis (Diana)," whereas, if you look at the article Diana (mythology), you'll see that the second and third sentences state: "Artemis was born with her twin brother Apollo on the island of Delos, daughter of Zeus and Leto. Diana, on the other hand, was the daughter of Jupiter and Latona." Deor (talk) 18:13, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I think you expressed your real reason for changing the era designations here. That is also not a valid reason for the change and verges on a violation of WP:POINT. Deor (talk) 15:28, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]