Talk:Forum Baths, Trier

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge proposal

@WIKI1Q2W3E4R, Cote d'Azur, Brshipley, Tom.Reding, Marcocapelle, Lumpeseggl, and Furius: All 3 of these articles, (Barbara Baths, Trier Imperial Baths, Forum Baths, Trier), are stubs and contain similar information. While the German Language pages will be helpful for expanding them, I feel merging the 3 articles into one article titled Roman Baths of Trier similar to the Baths_at_Ostia page would be a better use of the space and be more meaningful to a person reading about the baths. RJHSLatinteacher (talk) 17:46, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not vehemently opposed to it but do not quite see that the three articles contain "similar" information. There is at least no overlapping information. If the articles were to be merged, it would just result in the texts of the three current articles be put underneath each other. Marcocapelle (talk) 18:05, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is fair, I should have been more careful in how I phrased it. Thinking about it I guess it is more complimentary and would create a more meaningful understanding of the bathing environment in Trier. The sources I have that mention these bathhouses talk about the Imperial Baths and the Barbara Baths as a group (since the Forum ones are more recent) and that was where I got the idea from. RJHSLatinteacher (talk) 21:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At some point, I will get around to translating the de.wiki articles, but they have been on my list since 2013, so I don't think my promise of eventual action should get in the way of doing what is best for now. Furius (talk) 22:43, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely understand where you're coming from: Although the Barbarba Baths page probably has enough information to be a stand-alone article, the others at the moment do not, and merging them might allow for a viewer to find the information they're looking for easier, particularly if they are simply interested in the broad history of Roman Trier. However, in terms of page-views on the English Wikipedia, the Trier Imperial Baths gets way more views then either of the others. To note, the UNESCO World Heritage Site centered on the Roman Monuments of Trier (Roman Monuments, Cathedral of St Peter and Church of Our Lady in Trier) does not include the Forum Baths, so combining all three might be difficult from that perspective. Brshipley (talk) 15:06, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I did see the article about the Forum Baths being late to the UNESCO game and if I used that logic I should also include the churches and Porta Nigra as well. I am just thinking about it from a topographical and topical view point. I am pretty novice with my wikipedia skills where do you see the views a individual page gets? RJHSLatinteacher (talk) 15:54, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]