Talk:Augustus of Prima Porta

message: According to the Vatican Museum, the statue is currently under restoration. --Click me! write to me 14:07, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  under restoration 

message: Tnix997 (talk) 00:42, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested sources for new content:

message: I see doubts about the source quoted by the artist who created this statue, are there more information about this?.LuigiPortaro29 (talk)  17:24, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  September 2017 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Augustus of Prima Porta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive {newarchive} to http://plato.alien.de/bildarchiv/m%FCnchen%20-%20glyptothek/htm/_FG04.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:49, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi, I think divus is more appropriate to describe Augustus than god since according to Oxford Dictionary, a divus is a divinity who obtains this status posthumously and by human agency.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 青巷忧颜 (talk • contribs) 16:56, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  changing the word "god" into "divus" 

message: Hi, I added two sections on the grounding of the statue.  One focus on where exactly the statue is found in the Villa of Livia, another focus on the significance of the grounding.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 青巷忧颜 (talk • contribs) 23:47, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added sections on the grounding of the statue 

message: I was trying to add an section of interpretation on the grounding of the statue.  The context I was trying to add is wriiten below and it is based on "Gender, Identity and the Body in Greek and Roman Sculpture" by Rosemary Barrow and Michael silk. Does this sounds like a original thought? or is this ok for main space.
It was a common practice in Augustan Rome to collect honorific statuary at individuals' villa, however scholars have stated that the viewership of Prima Porta Augustus added another significance to the sculpture. Barrow and Silk have argued that the sculpture was a way for Augustus to express male superiority.  The location of Caelus above Tellus on the cuirass implies that the societal position of women was inferior to that of men. They further note that although Livia was born into an aristocratic family, her marriage to Augustus restricted her role as a mother and Augustus' supporter and that her subjection to Augustus was further consolidated in her daily observations of Prima Porta Augustus in the villa.
They have also noted that despite this, by placing the statue in her villa Livia was trying to establish her own authority, as the villa was a place for public display rather than a private collection. As such, the viewership was not limited to her and were considerable challenges to Livia, since she would need to fulfill the principle of decorum while also expressing her own influence. Barrow and Silk further wrote that the statue had two purposes; it demonstrated the divinity and military prowess of Augustus to the multitude and identified Livia as Iulia Augusta, a widow of an emperor who claimed divine lineage.[21]  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 青巷忧颜 (talk • contribs) 22:43, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone help me check this source 

message: The polychrome proposal of Augusto de Prima Porta presented at the Tarraco Viva Festival was made by researchers Dr. Emma Zahonero Moreno and Jesús Mendiola Puig, members of the SETOPANT research group of the URV of Tarragona, after a previous investigation on the techniques and the procedures of painting and polychromy in Greco-Roman times. A poster was presented at the 2014 Biennial Congress Tarraco.
The sculpture of Braga was made based on this proposal by the same authors.--MV Arte (talk) 10:31, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Authorship of the proposal by Augusto de Prima Porta polychrome of Tarragona (MV Arte) 

message: In the "Original" section, it seems an editor added an odd sentence that contradicts the sentence immediately preceding it. The second paragraph (with no sources cited), states that "The statue might have been commissioned by Tiberius..." It's followed by an odd sentence that reads "In reality, the copy was commissioned by Livia, his third wife (and his husband at his time of death), to commemorate him." Aside from the problematic use of "In reality," the author presumably meant to say that Livia was Augusts' wife (not husband) at the time of his death. None of the sentences is supported by a cited source. Global Cerebral Ischemia (talk) 02:31, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "In reality...Livia was his husband"? 

message: Just to mention it, in the coming days I'll probably move the citation style for this article over to  + . It would be largely to clean up the cruft with the current references section, which seems currently to try to do footnotes and full references in the same place, doing both rather poorly. Ifly6 (talk) 02:24, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: go ahead, I'm not too familiar with  but my experience with medical articles means I know  almost like the back of my hand. The only thing I need to know is whether you're keeping the page citations Oxford style or Vancouver style. X-750 List of articles that I have screwed over 02:27, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what you mean by Oxford vs Vancouver.  creates citations like  As to the long-form references themselves, I would use  with CS1 settings. Ifly6 (talk) 03:06, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Ifly6 That's okay, that answes my questions. Full steam ahead. X-750 List of articles that I have screwed over 03:40, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  References