Talk:Augusta

Latest comment: 15 years ago by Botteville in topic Totally missing articles

Requested move

edit
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Move. —Centrxtalk • 21:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Augusta (disambiguation)AugustaAugusta, Georgia, currently has Augusta as a redirect. However, the city in Georgia does not satisfy "Primary topic" as set out on WP:DAB, particularly with state capital Augusta, Maine, and Roman honorific Augusta on the disambiguation list. Bolivian Unicyclist 00:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Survey

edit

Discussion

edit
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The original Latin names of many ancient places - in Australia

edit

too good to correct it... Stupid girl (talk) 22:10, 18 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Praenome, cognomen of places

edit

Places did not and do not have a praenomen or cognomen; that is only for people. Whether the Augustus goes before or after is an accident of naming the place. For example, if it was named after the tribe, the tribal name by convention was in the genitive case placed after the Augustus. No one was ever named "Augustus of the Suessiones." Naturally there are one or two cases of places given the name of a person, which did have an agnomen (a lot of these "cognomina" are agnomina). They are few and far between here and if more were put in, such as Caesar Augustus, they would have to take their own disambig page. Moreover, this misapplication of the Roman personal naming scheme is very confusing to the public. I find it confusing. This is actually original research; no one else organizes place names by praenomina, cognomina, etc. Very clever but totally confusing and original, so I am reorganizing to the usual people and places.Dave (talk) 10:53, 27 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Totally missing articles

edit

Many of these items are being used to suggest totally new articles; they are not even subsections of a main article. This is not the place to suggest new articles. The disambig as I understand it is to prevent confusion and give index direction to existing articles, which it cannot do if the article does not even exist as part of another article. So, I am fixing the red links the way it is done in all the other disambigs.Dave (talk) 10:53, 27 September 2009 (UTC)Reply