Talk:Aventine Hill

Mountains Low‑importance

	Mountains portal This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Italy Mid‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 25 August 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved to Aventine hill. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Untitled

A very informative article and I just have a few suggestions. First, I would edit the link in the etymology section to only cover the word "Aventinus." You also might want to include the dates of Ancus Marcius's rule. I would also replace the phrase "fascism" with the "fascist period" or "under fascist rule" or something like that. Finally, a couple of the sources require NU passwords to access the articles, which might be problematic for those wanting to access your sources.24.12.189.96 23:06, 14 May 2007 (UTC)Dan Frydman[reply]

Generally good article, just a few suggestions. You may want to expand and clarity the original definition, it's somewhat cryptic. Also, the large paragraph in the Mythology section is a bit confusing. You might want to rework the language for greater clarity. --21:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC)Roswell Mueller

I think the Etymology section, very interesting theories for how the hill was named. For the Aventinus terms I would suggest linking just a few words rather than a short phrase. The Mythology section got kind of confusing with with all the different hills. I recommend going over this again. The ancient and medieval section could use a little smoothing out. Jing Yuan Liu 05:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC) Jing Yuan Liu[reply]

Palatine, not Aventine

" An alternate etymology comes directly from the founding of Rome. Romulus saw birds from Aventine Hill, not Palatine Hill, so Aventine Hill was aptly named as where Romulus saw his omen (birds = "aves"). "

I can not obtain the source, but it is clearly incorrect. Livy and every other Roman historian clearly state that Romulus was on the Palatine, while Remus was on the Aventine. It is also stated as such in other Wikipedia pages on the Founding of Rome, Romulus and Remus, etc. Since they both saw an omen of birds, it is unlikely that only one hill would be named after such an event, especially since the founder, Romulus, spotted 12 vultures and founded Rome on the Palatine. 129.59.47.19 (talk) 23:39, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where to go?

I've cleaned up (a bit) some of the ancient history section. Currently there's nothing at all for the medieval period. The Etymology section's too long, and doesn't make clear that the etymologies given are ancient, and possibly spurious. We need secondary scholarship on these issues. Not sure we even need a "Mythology" section; or if we do, it needs rewriting. Why Cacus and Hercules?

The article's one of a series (see category bar) on the Seven Hills. The legal boundaries of the hills have changed over time, as I think someone has stated in the article. Perhaps that's why someone included the Circus Maximus, Temple of Vesta and sundry other things non-Aventine or at least not distinctively Aventine in the infobox. I see a pope there; nothing about him in the article at all. And the Fascist-era Aventine Seccession is there; the brief summary in the article seems to belong. Should it, though?

My underlying criticism is that this is surely - or should be - an article on the Ancient Roman Aventine Hill. No? Yes? The infobox links to another article ~~on the modern Aventine, or more precisely, to the modern Italian~~ Ripa~~, which I assume includes at least some modern history. To be honest, I haven't checked out whether it does or not but~~ Hm, not much there. Anyway, I think the post-Roman info really serves only to confuse things here. Comments on this matter will be very welcome. Haploidavey (talk) 14:12, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 25 August 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 23:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

– decap "hill" per MOS:CAPS Ifly6 (talk) 22:41, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). — Amakuru (talk) 10:53, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Contesting all of these—Ngrams indicate that the capitalized versions are substantially more common than the uncapitalized ones, so I think there's a strong argument that the MOS:CAPS threshold is satisfied. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:05, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Extraordinary Writ above. Ngrams show a large lead for the "___ Hill" variants, which I think is enough for the "substantial majority" required by MOS:CAPS. — Amakuru (talk) 10:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per evidence. Srnec (talk) 00:49, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. These are usually treated as proper names, and capitalized. The fact that not everybody does so doesn't mean that they're not. P Aculeius (talk) 12:59, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Lucius Vorenus?

Listed under people, but if you read his link, the only “evidence” that he was associated with the Aventine is through an HBO Miniseries. Propose he be removed, or that a better reference for his association be added. 67.241.134.138 (talk) 20:02, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]