Talk:Catacombs of Rome

message: This article could do with images - plenty out there!--shtove 23:30, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The article’s lead describes the catacombs as a place of burial for Christians and Jews alike. The remainder of the article, however, is entirely about Christians. It would be good to have some clarification and expansion. —Ian Spackman 06:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, they were extensively used by pagan Romans too. Johnbod (talk) 22:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

text: And what on earth is meant by this sentence: "The Jewish catacombs are similarly important for the study of Jew Gold at this period"?  Jew Gold?--98.114.178.63 (talk) 07:28, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Vandal 4 days ago. Now reverted. Johnbod (talk) 16:10, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jews 

message: Edited for grammar and clarity under Catacombs of Domitilla. 68.34.95.56 (talk) 00:17, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Basic Editing 

message: The article states that there is a bust of St. Sebastian in San Sebastiano however, I believe the Bernini bust  in the church is actually of Christ.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.160.107.50 (talk) 00:41, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bernini Bust 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Catacombs of Rome. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20041121025235/http://www.catacombe.roma.it/en/intro.html to http://www.catacombe.roma.it/en/intro.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:26, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: My edit to reduce redundancy was reverted: "what do you mean?". This reason is not good enough to revert. "Underground cave" is redundant, because all caves are underground by definition. If you feel the need to distinguish this cave, please provide a reason wanting to re-add "underground". Leitmotiv (talk) 20:48, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. I've reverted the anon IP's revert. Dave.Dunford (talk) 00:04, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Underground cave 

message: We are a group of students at the university level looking to edit and improve the information on this Wikipedia page. Through research, we have found information that will enhance the level of information provided on this page regarding the catacombs of Rome.
Changes for the section on Jewish Catacombs:
'''
Jewish catacombs are distinguished from their Christian counterparts by various signs as well as the fact that Jewish people did not visit the dead in the catacombs. Parts of the Old Testament and the symbol of a candlestick with seven-branches have been spotted on the walls of Jewish catacombs.
Due to high levels of humidity and temperature, bone preservation has been negatively affected in the catacombs. Scientists are unable to identify the sex of the dead due to the lack of preservation in the bones.
Discoveries section:
'''
Through research, it has been found that the population’s diet consisted of freshwater fish. Sample D9-W-XVI-8, considered to be a two-year-old child, shows that children in Ancient Rome were breastfed and this child, in particular, was not yet exposed to weaning off of their mother. It can be determined that the child had not begun to wean due to the fact that the δ15N values had not begun to decline.
Fish in the early Christian diet was not only for symbolic and religious reasons, but was also used as a meal to commemorate the dead. Fish also represented that the religious and the secular were intertwined in Roman society as fish was a concrete staple of the daily diet.
Henrykuv (talk) 13:17, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Changes 

message: Originally the system of complex tunnels, later known as the catacombs, were first excavations by the Etruscan people that lived in the region, predating the Romans. The system of tunnels that became the catacombs, was first excavated in the process of mining for various rock resources such as limestone and sandstone. These quarries became the basis for later excavation, first by the Romans for rock resources and then the Christians and Jews for burial sites and mass graves."Roman Catacombs". The Friend; a Religious and Literary Journal (1827-1906), vol. 31, no. 35, May 08, 1858, pp. 274. ProQuest, http://proxygw.wrlc.org/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/91208926?accountid=11243.
Fudymben (talk) 13:14, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of Excavation 

message: Here is, in case you cannot see it, my source: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/first/catacombs.html
:"The catacombs hold a very interesting place in the romantic tradition about how early Christianity developed. It's often been suggested that these were great hiding places, and the Christians would go down in the catacombs to worship during periods of persecution. But really there weren't that regular kinds of persecution going on, and even when we find larger rooms or chambers in the catacombs, they weren't used for regular worship. Churches didn't go down in there to hold Eucharist and assembly on a regular basis. So, what were these rooms used for? Why did they have benches lining the walls, what looked like places where you could hold eucharistic assembly? The answer is, they're holding meals for the dead. We know, in fact, from a number of sources, Christian and non-Christian alike, that the funerary meal, a kind of picnic with the dead, was something that most families practiced in the city of Rome. So, we have to imagine as part of their daily life, as part of their regular activity, Christians, just like their pagan neighbors, going down into the catacombs to hold memorial meals with dead members of their families."
It was at the end of the paragraph I added. I do not understand what else you are trying to say, I have given attribution from the very beginning to this paragraph. Veverve (talk) 06:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I trust you are not as petty as undoing my edit because I did not say "According to prof. L. Michael White" at the beginning of it. For, surely, if it was the case you would have simply added it yourself, instead of bluntly undoing my edit. Veverve (talk) 07:00, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

text: *It's got nothing to do with petty. Including a large block quote without attribution is contrary to WP:QUOTE, MOS:QUOTE, and WP:NPS. I'm the second person who has taken issue with your use of block quotes without attribution and you have blindly reverted both times, contrary to WP:BRD. Paraphrase properly and rewrite the paragraph with proper citations and your edits likely won't be reverted. St★lwart111 09:14, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Does it suit you now? By the way, the version you reverted was not . Veverve (talk) 15:02, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't have to suit me, and you've reverted (breaking WP:3RR) 3 times in 24 hours to re-insert your favoured content. Of course it was a block quote... so much so that it was a copyright violation. The fact that you have sort-of rewritten part of the introduction in your own words makes it marginally better. But the fact of the matter is that you inserted copyright material into an article and then edited it. It doesn't work that way. St★lwart111 00:38, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You've ignored WP:BRD, edit-warred per WP:3RR, and you're still trying to insert the same block quote without attribution. So I've referred this to WP:ANI. St★lwart111 01:12, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accusation of OR 

message: the latest additions are really solid. I'm glad that we were able to get things on the right track. St★lwart111 12:38, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks! I am glad we were able to sort things out. Veverve (talk) 17:08, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Latest additions