Talk:Atia of the Julii/Archive 1

Fixing the Atia Article

I recently viewed the series again and I have corrected some of the one-sided statements about Atia as well as expanding her personality and character history sections. The Atia article is terrible one-sided because they make her out to be a lot worse then what she really is in the story and the whole "fertility ritual" was completely false, the ritual with the bull was a normal sacrifice done by temples. Atia was merely taking part to ask the mother goddess if Octavian would be safe! Also, no one has mentioned Atia's clear affections for her son and daughter, so I added a small part to her personality. --Camblunt100 17:02, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Why Butcher Atia?!!

The Daftman, I don't know who you think you are but you have butchered this article and edited so much of the good stuff that is of interest to fans! The question is "Why?!" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.41.34.160 (talk • contribs) 10:28, July 22, 2006 (UTC)

I edited out parts that weren't necessary or just sounded off. I'm a fan of Rome and I don't think I've butchered it and if you are talking about the quotes they don't belong here so that's why they've been removed. Eric 17:00, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Well the article proposes facts about Atia's intentions which have not been verified, says she has done things that she clearly has not and the list goes on. 90% of this article needs to be scrapped and rewritten. MagnoliaSouth | Talk 14:51, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

If this article's as fabriated as you claim, how come no one else has said anything about it or made any similar complaint? I suspect the only one who feels this way is you, and an entire article cannot be changed to suit one person. And from the extent to which you believe Atia is misrepresented in this article, are you sure you saw this series at all? Perhaps you bought the wrong box set, or put on the wrong TV channel 80.41.22.159 12:46, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

False Claims

This sentence:

Atia launches a violent assault on her daughter, attacking her with a whip.

and this one:

When Atia learns of this, after beating up both Octavia and Octavian for their perversity,

are completely untrue. Atia never attacked (or "beat up"; what kind of wording is that anyway?) her daughter, nor did she flog her. She did threathen her with a whip but only threatened, or at the very most attempted to flog her. Atia never attacked Octavia with it at all. In fact, the whip never even touched her daughter. As for "beating up" Octavian, she slapped him which hardly qualifies as beating up anyone and besides, this is an article not a blog and "beating up" anyone is not good writing. I move that these be stricken from the article, or at least the article reworded so that it is actually correct. MagnoliaSouth 13:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Attention: when Octavian intervenes, Atia IS actually chasing AND striking Octavia with the whip (hence Octavia's screams!), which most of us would call "launching a violent assault". Yours is the false statement when you claim "the whip never even touched Octavia", which is ridiculously untrue. Might I suggest you saw a censored version of that episode if you don't recall any physical violence in that scene! As for the use of the phrase "beating up", it was the first phrase that came to mind and I didn't see a problem as I was sure others would come along eventually and reword it themselves without making an international crisis out of it. JJ (the author of the "false claims")

First, please sign your comments as per Wiki protocol. Second, I own the DVD and the scene shows an attempt by Atia to hit Octavia, and is a lousy one at best. My conviction, and claim, stands. There is no "beating up" nor "launching a violent assault". MagnoliaSouth | Talk 15:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Dictionary.com defines launch as "to burst out or plunge boldly or directly into action". What I saw was Atia violently attacking her daughter, hitting her with the whip and definitely making more than enough contact to warrant 'launching a violent assault'. The term "launches a violent assault" stands until I hear more than just your opinion on the matter, though to be honest I find this a rather bizarre/trivial debate to be having! JJ 80.41.14.187 23:15, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I corrected the statement to reflect what is fact. MagnoliaSouth | Talk 11:20, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Additionally, if it is reverted, I'll put in for a request for comments. I think that's fair. MagnoliaSouth | Talk 11:21, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I have corrected the statement to reflect what is fact. Put in your request. 80.43.43.2 14:21, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Looks like someone finally agreed with me. I'm glad to see it is accurate now. MagnoliaSouth ^(talk) 19:20, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

RFC

A request for comment is being made due to the nature of the words in the attached article. It is believed that some sentences in the article are not factual, and some are of an opinion. Additionally, there is mention of specific episodes where the character performs actions and it is disputed on whether or not these actions did or did not occur. 15:23, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Come off it!

I've not seen anybody judging Atia by today's standards in this article; but let's call a spade a spade. Her behaviour would define her as a villainess and a bitch quite frankly, even by Roman standards (murdering your daughter's husband was not the accepted norm, you know). This is not to say Atia is a detestable character, in fact I only watched the whole series mainly for her and her conflicts with Servilia of the Junii, and she has to be my favourite character. But she's not Mary Poppins, and it would be silly to start trying to justify her actions, as she is fictional not a real person, so one can only take what you see and relate it factually in this article. If she behaves furiously then she should be described as "furious", if she's sexually voracious then she should be described as such, not "but that's not fair because Roman women were often promiscuous, so her behaviour is perfectly normal so stop victimising her!" Atia's reaction to the news of Caesar's death would be described as devastation, but her reaction to the news of her children's incest was hardly the same was it? She didn't attack Servilia when she told her about Caesar's death as she was "devastated". She attacked/threatened/whatever Octavia and Octavian because her most overpowering emotion at the time was rage/fury. Atia is villainous with a capital V, she's a bitch with a capital B, and I love her with a capital F-A-B-U-L-O-U-S! But it seems like no one can say a bad word against her without her 21st century PR people jumping on the defensive, practically threatening to sue for libel, lol! 80.43.4.50 16:10, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

What's going on here?

Just reread the Atia article. It was way off on facts from the show in regards to Atia and Servilia rivalry. Also it went into far to much detail about Servilia. In fact most of the personality section was about Servilia and it was incorrect. Please remember the page is about the character Atia. There is a page about Servilia. Also in regards to actions taken with the children. Please be sure of facts in regards to this show before editing. I edited it to reflect the show's plots and characters more accurately. Amadscientist 16:37, 28 January 2007 (UTC).

That's what everyone says! Yet we've still failed to find agreement! 212.139.231.63 23:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Current state of the article - March 2007=

Since the bulk of this talk page is discussing the "poor state of the article" from months ago, I wanted to note for new editors that it's in pretty good shape now. I do intend to add more plot not yet included from the end of Season 2. TAnthony 01:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Season 2, Episode 8: Kissing Daughter?

What explanation can be given for the kissing of her daughter's neck and cheek so strangely in Season 2, Episode 8 aside from the implication of an incestual relationship? Can anyone propose how this is to be considered at this time? Just edit it in later if it's actually mentioned since anything else is just an assumption? --OMG LAZERS 02:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Title of Article

The title of the article should clearly indicate that the content of this entry is regarding a fictionalized account of the historical Atia. I would even go as far as to say this article redirect to that of the historical figure or at least a disambiguation page. This is an encyclopedia, accounts of fact should precede accounts of fiction. 81.101.143.89 19:29, 26 April 2007 (UTC)David

I disagree; the phrasing "Atia of the Julii" is really specific to the series, no one looking for the historical Atia would put that in. This goes for most of the feamle characters; it is unnecessary to put (Rome) afterwards, as with the men, because the names are unique.

The article for Atia (the logical search word) is the article for the historical figure(s), and Atia Balba etc redirect there. Anyway, this article states clearly in the opening paragraph this it is a fictional character based on the historical figure, and provides the link. TAnthony 21:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Portrayal reminiscent of Edina "Eddy" Monsoon

Noticed the “F-A-B-U-L-O-U-S”, there is a lot of the “Eddy in the 1st century” about Rome’s Atia. The characters mannerisms are reminiscent of Jennifer Saunders’s lead role in Absolutely Fabulous.

It’s as if someone told the actress to “Do her like Eddy Darling, like Eddy, and do that thing, you know that thing Darling, yes, like Eddy…” —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.47.150.44 (talk) 01:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)