Talk:Via Flaminia

Italy High‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Highways: Europe Mid‑importance

	Roads portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Highways, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of highways on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HighwaysWikipedia:WikiProject HighwaysTemplate:WikiProject HighwaysHighways articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the European Highways Task Force.

1911 Britannica template

Although this article started as the 1911 Britannica article, it's been very much altered and expanded. How long do we keep "{{1911}}"? A general question applying to other articles as well, of course. Bill 23:26, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

For as long as the article continues to incorporate any text whatsoever from the article, and I would say that probably means forever. To use text from uncited sources is plagiarism. - Nunh-huh 23:31, 92 Sep 1820 (UTC)

A rewrite from scratch would suffice, and I figure that we'll want to do that sooner or later to all of them anyway - patched-up ancient text looks like, well, patched-up ancient text. Stan 02:00, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

After you've spent a couple of hours rewriting and checking references etc., sometimes it's irritating to see that message because there's a sequence of seven words that remain.... but who's working for credit, anyway! Wetman 08:34, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

More to the point would be to cite the current EB, and rather than saying it incorporates, cite it properly. --Michael Goodyear ✐ ✉ 18:26, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pons Mulvius vs Battle of the Milvian Bridge

Which is it? Wetman 08:34, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

From the standpoint of Wikipedia, I wouldn't know. The bridge and the battle would be two separate articles, mind you, which would solve the problem. The most usual name of the battle in English is, by far, Battle of the Milvian Bridge — and as you know, it's worth its own article because of the apparition of the Christian sign in the sky; which, as you probably also know, may not have occurred, if it did occur, at the Milvian Bridge at all, since Eusebius I believe mentions it while Maxentius is still in Northern Italy. The most usual name of the bridge in Latin — of this I personally am much less certain — is Pons Mulvius with a U, although Milvius is also seen. The modern Italian name of the bridge, which is not Roman except possibly for the pilings, is Ponte Molle although Ponte Milvio, like so many names from classical Antiquity, started making a resurgence during the period of Mussolini's visions of grandeur: but I think Romans currently call it mostly Ponte Molle. Bill 11:31, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Battles?

The paragraph on battles is anachronistic. Sentinum was the site of a famous battle in 295, 75 years before Flaminius was censor. I propose to delete it. - Eponymous-Archon (talk) 23:10, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]