Talk:Argonautica

message: :The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED a couple of days ago by User:Aldux. -GTBacchus(talk) 02:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Argonautika → Argonautica — this work's most common name in English is Argonautica. See for instance , , . WP:GREEK also suggests that the title should be Argonautica. A redirect page is obstructing the move. --Akhilleus (talk) 21:15, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.</div>
====Google test results====
 28,100 pages for "Argonautika"
 192,000 pages for "Argonautica"
Results from Google. Wirbelwind 22:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: Add  * Support  or  * Oppose  on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.
*Support - I couldn't agree more; Argonautica is more common, and the guideline for Greek names points clearly in that direction.--Aldux 21:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Add any additional comments:
Regards what Jene said, it's not really the case; the present article was started at Argonautika, while Argonautica was just a redirect to Jason, after a previous stub had been merged with the former. Since we all appear to agree, I'me ready to move the article personally right now; as an admin, I can overcome the redirect obstruction. Any objections.--Aldux 20:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.</div>
====Google test results====
 28,100 pages for "Argonautika"
 192,000 pages for "Argonautica"
Results from Google. Wirbelwind 22:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: 28,100 pages for "Argonautika"
 192,000 pages for "Argonautica"
Results from Google. Wirbelwind 22:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Google test results

message: All the English translations were grouped under 'verse.'  One that I got is prose, so I moved it to 'prose,' but several of the others may be prose also.  Green's translation is the only newer verse one I have heard of by someone that has actually read it.--Dchmelik (talk) 04:47, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have Green's here, and Hunter's. Both prose. Green has splendid notes that make the reading experience much richer.--Wetman (talk) 04:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That is interesting, but I would not call any prose translation of poetry 'richer reading.'  Poetry may be almost humourous or introspective to read, but I think it also causes only necessary (but deeper) introspection compared to prose and is more to the point.  I hope we can get the 'translations' section cleaned up.  It needs to show at least one academic standard translation into English verse--if it exists--because usually it can be translated into verse that mostly rhymes and it makes the book much easier to look through to find parts in.  That is why epics number the verses: one can find specific statements/lines quite easily.  Right now I do not trust the translations' categorization except for the one I looked up and probably the one you mentioned--since you have at least a couple--though the review I read did recommend Green's as verse: I must just check out as many as I can.--Dchmelik (talk) 21:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  misinformation about translations 

message: I'll be making some changes here very soon, if nobody gets in ahead of me.
Some kind of protocol is needed to divide material between this article and Apollonius Rhodius. I intend using this article for synopses of plot, characters and places, with some coverage of genre and the uniqueness of the poem. General issues of poetic style and reception should be treated over at the other article, even though based almost entirely on Argonautica, since it is not unlike his other works and is the only complete example we have. McOoee (talk) 01:39, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Ditto!  davidiad.: 18:21, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  new edit 

message: Most of the wiki entry for Argonautica is comprised of extraneous "information" and should be subjected to deletion.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.86.119.111 (talk) 08:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  This entry is an essay. 

message: As for all texts from antiquity, a section on the state of manuscript evidence (extant manuscripts, lost manuscripts documented to have existed in earlier times, their relationship, noteworthy differences...) would be very welcome. -- 194.39.218.10 (talk) 10:54, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manuscripts? 

message: I just changed the heading levels because it makes more sense this way. I thought I would mention it here in case someone objects to it, but I don't imagine it will be a big issue. Thiagovscoelho (talk) 17:30, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heading levels changed