Talk:Santa Maria Maggiore

message: The article badly needs a lot more information on this extremely famous and important cycle, instead of the vague mention currently here.  Johnbod 13:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mosaics 

message: When was the Liberian Basilica rededicated to the BVM? The article is mute on this point. --13:49, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the legend, Liberius himself dedicated it to the Virgin to celebrate the apparition. Sixtus III rebuilt it in 432 to celebrate the declaration of the Theotokos by the Council of Ephesus, so it was dedicated to Mary at least from that time on. Rwflammang 16:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Liberian Basilica

message: I noticed that the article mentions the sculpture of Pope Sixtus V; here's an image of that sculpture, if someone wants to try to incorporate it into the appropriate section. I didn't try because that section of the article is already pretty well filled with images. --Quuxplusone (talk) 10:40, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yet another image 

message: " Saint Cajetan holding the Holy Child, by Bernini " is in the list of major art works. Is it definitely correct? I was there today and couldn't find it despite asking the staff, including one of the museum curators who seemed to know everything about the church. He thinks this is a mistake. 212.183.128.22 (talk) 18:41, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Saint Cajetan holding the Holy Child, by Bernini 

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that the featured picture :File:Dome of Cappella Paolina in Santa Maria Maggiore (Rome).jpg, which is used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for August 25, 2020. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2020-08-25. Any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be made before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:16, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Dome of Cappella Paolina in Santa Maria Maggiore (Rome).jpg]] scheduled for POTD 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:06, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: This edit established the usage of the page as American English. Kindly maintain it consistently, pending a new consensus to the contrary. — LlywelynII 19:44, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:ENGVAR]]

message: I know everyone has been busy arguing about how they didn't know Maria Maggiore is the more common English name of this church and always has been. (Support move to Maria Maggiore when it inevitably comes up for discussion.)
That said, the current page is pretty much a disgrace and could use more focus on just having it make sense. The name section was called "Other appellations". Easy enough to fix, but it should also pull down most of the needless namegore out of the lead sentence. Further pull out all the random legendaria. It can go into a new Legend section or into the next part of History below the Roman bits, but very little of the 5 long paragraphs is actually about names. The history section was called 'History of the current church' despite there being no section on any earlier church. Easy enough to fix, but it should also discuss the site's Roman history and the modern excavations. It should also clarify exactly what is left from the 5th century building if Wikipedia is going along with considering this a 1500 year old Ship of Theseus. There are two separate "Papal basilica" sections that obviously need to be merged and moved out of the space before the History. There was needless fascist propaganda out of Zerocalcare that... well... it's still there but at least now it's slightly less racist and ordered correctly. The interior decoration sections randomly add and subtract = signs from their section titles. &c. &c. &c.  — LlywelynII 18:54, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: General cleanup

message: As pointed out above, this church was raised at a prominent position in the city and incorporated earlier ruins, which have subsequently been excavated. Talk about them. Apparently there's an entire agricultural calendar under there. Even if you view that all as pagan nonsense, go ahead and include it (a) for the rest of us and (b) for the necessary NPOV for Wikipedia, in addition to (c) the satisfaction of the church being there and the pagans not. If people have added it over the years and it's been removed, kindly put it back and let admins know about people removing cited and relevant content that readers want to know about. — LlywelynII 18:54, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Roman history