Talk:Getica (disambiguation)

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

History

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles

Untitled

Quod a recentiorae authore de rebus antiquis sine alicuius vetustioris Authoritate profertur, contemnitur.

Nasz 11:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iordanis Romana et Getica and Getica (Jordanes)

What exactly is the relation between Getica (Jordanes) and Iordanis Romana et Getica? Cows fly kites (Aecis) ^Rule^/^{Contributions} 11:03, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've attempted to explain this to Nasz for ages, but he doesn't see to get it, or pretends not to get it: Jordanes wrote two works, Getica and Romana, whose critical editions were both made in 1882 and both published in the MGH. To put it clearer, Iordanis Romana et Getica is the joint publication of both works.--Aldux 13:19, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you quote any other accessible source of booth or of each separate? As we remember from other discussion you was not able to provide a link to existing book where I can read the earlier edition. I thinking that you Aldux have the book in drawer but I don’t understand why you don’t want to share the knowledge. It's very strange how secret is your behavior ;) Why you just dont make a photo and post it on wikipedia ? Nasz 05:58, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of links and sections

Hi! I've seen that some of the links and sections were removed and I am looking for a better explanation. I am relatively new to Wikipedia editing and I wondering what are your suggestions when it comes to ancient history articles marked with questionable notability or without enough content. For example I created the stubs Getica (Dio), Getica (Criton) and Getica (Pârvan). I was hoping to expand them and invite people to contribute. Instead, the first was marked with questionable notability, the other two were merged/removed without any questions asked. One section about Getica as a country was also removed from this article. I find all this very subjective especially when it comes to ancient history articles. I opened a discussion also here. You guys can pitch in and share your thoughts and experience.--Codrinb (talk) 17:07, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]