Talk:Gaddi Torso

A fact from Gaddi Torso appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 14 May 2009 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the heroic Greek marble Gaddi Torso %28pictured%29 in the Uffizi, Florence, was so admired in the Italian Renaissance that it was never "restored" by completing it?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2009/May.

Wikipedia

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.

Visual arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles

"Completing" a torso

I'm a little confused by the last line (and the DYK entry) - what does "completing a torso" mean and imply? Do we have an article on the subject we can link to? -- 128.104.112.117 (talk) 14:00, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, let's change the calendar to one that is appropriate for an object and article of this type

Is this sufficiently bureaucratic?
Varlaam (talk) 02:56, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree that a BC style is more appropriate for the Gaddi Torso or Hellenistic art in general. I am a member of the Institute of Classical Studies Library in London and last year when the library moved all the shelves were relabeled to the BCE form. My impression is that is the trend.Dejvid (talk) 13:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing particularly Christian about the Gaddi Torso. No one suggests BCE/CE is suited to a Christian subject. A matter of taste.--Wetman (talk) 16:58, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is an italicization error in footnote 15

Can we please have a quorum or a minyan of people to agree to correct the error?
Varlaam (talk) 02:57, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We don't want to just fly off the handle and fix an error.

God forbid.

I assume that your point here is that changing eras is absurdly bureaucratic and that if all changes were treated like this things would get ridiculous. Well, yes, changing eras is unwieldy - that's intentional. BCE and BC edit wars were prevalent in the past and that has produced the current consensus. In the main it works by making any change in either direction difficult. You seem to think that changing BCE to BC is just correcting an error. Please read WP:ERA and that should be clear. By contrast, the italics of a footnote is unlikely to provoke an edit war even if people disagree with you. But thanks for making your point on the talk page - much appreciated.Dejvid (talk) 12:14, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]