Talk:Gaius Iulius Caesar (name)/Draft

Article re-approval and version record area

---

Article re-approval and version record area

---

Approval process for Gaius Iulius Caesar (name) approval versions This article was first nominated for approval by Classics editor Catherine Feeley for version 100135496. --Matt Innis (Talk) 23:04, 18 July 2007 (CDT) Newest revision is 1001135528. I think the article can be approved now. —Arne Eickenberg 11:08, 25 July 2007 (CDT) Yet another quick revision (100135727): changed the format of the footnotes. —Arne Eickenberg 11:31, 25 July 2007 (CDT) Latest version is 100146989: added the Greek translation of the name.  Arne Eickenberg  talk 18:47, 7 August 2007 (CDT) / 2nd edit: corrected error (Y for U) and added footnote w/ lower case Greek. Please include for approval. 19:10, 7 August 2007 (CDT) / 3rd edit (minor): removed abbreviations; don't think I know any sources. 19:17, 7 August 2007 (CDT) latest version: 100146993; had to remove the <big>-typeface, because it apparently doesn't work with popovers.  Arne Eickenberg  talk 19:45, 7 August 2007 (CDT) Changes made after approval nomination Corrected the remark on Iuppiter's older name Iovis. There were other old Jupiter-names, e.g. the archaic Zeus-derivate Dieus. Therefore sentence changed from "which used to be the older name of Iuppiter" to "which used to be one of the older names of Iuppiter". The revision-ID for the nominated article should accordingly be updated. —Arne Eickenberg 23:56, 18 July 2007 (CDT) I thought the page should have been approved by now, why is it still a draft? Yi Zhe Wu 13:33, 6 August 2007 (CDT) Added subpage templates etc. and subpages. Changed the nominated version.  Arne Eickenberg  talk 14:03, 6 August 2007 (CDT) also added Greek name (see above). Please include. Thx. Aug 2007 approval Catherine Feeley nominated the version dated 14:01, 6 August 2007 (CDT) of the article as well as one subpage for approval. The Classics Workgroup oversaw this approval and the article was approved on, or around, 20070724. Matt, above might be pasted into an approval page template to give a pretty layout. It would also be really useful, with respect to update approvals, for a short summary of the changes made. Especially, it would be good to note major issues that have reach a consensus so old, especially controversial, topics are not continually rehased. Chris Day (talk) 08:03, 21 August 2007 (CDT) Let's go ahead and try it on this article and see if it is feasible. --Matt Innis (Talk) 10:04, 21 August 2007 (CDT) How about something similar to the template above? See {{Approval}} if you want to tweek it. Chris Day (talk) 10:57, 21 August 2007 (CDT) Matt, i just realised we'll have to transfer across the workgroup data too (cat1, cat2 and cat3). It can't be read from the articles metadata as that is the current workgroup allocation and we need to have the workgroup list that was current at the time of approval. Chris Day (talk) 12:49, 21 August 2007 (CDT)

Name

Given that there is no article at Caesar do we really need to tag ", name" on the end of this article. Similar to other name/title based articles such as Baron and Baronet. Derek Harkness 11:09, 4 June 2007 (CDT)

Now changed. Caesar (as disambiguation, name etc.) is now in "See also". —Arne Eickenberg 21:23, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

"Jiulius Caesar" as a name

There is a prominent American politician that uses the name "Julius Caesar". Yi Zhe Wu 19:12, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

Interesting. :-) There's also a German politican by the name Cajus-Julius Caesar. These two would be mentioned in the article Julius Caesar (disambiguation) or in an article called Julius Caesar (name). This article here is only about those whose name was (or is) actually Gaius Iulius Caesar, not even Gaius Julius Caesar with an anglicized J…, i.e. (most probably) only people from Roman antiquity. Cheers. —Arne Eickenberg 21:48, 16 July 2007 (CDT)

approval subpage

I just added an approval subpage, some thing I have wanted to see for a while. I'm interested in feed back. Matt has seen this before but we never pushed to finalise the details. The primary reason for such a beast is to keep the approval related edits seperate from the talk page edits. It should make it a lot easier to reconstruct the approval history of an article. This might not be that helpful now but when these articles have been through multiple approvals and are serveral years old it might be advantageous. Chris Day (talk) 18:29, 7 August 2007 (CDT)

Oh yes, a beast it is. I had already included the green approval-nomination template on the approval-page, but just an hour ago it didn't connect to the talk page. It took me a roughly two hours yesterday to get into all the subpage methods incl. the approval page, metadata etc.… and I love it… love the tabbed template 9… of course it increases complexity if you work on an article, especially during the final stage, but for the reader it's much better this way. In addition I found out that if you create all the relevant subpages right after article creation, everything is pretty smooth. No worries. (Probably. ^_^) PS: I will move the relevant posts from the talk page to the approval subpage.  Arne Eickenberg  talk 18:55, 7 August 2007 (CDT)