Talk:Financial crisis of 33

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Juxlos in topic Criticism

Did you know nomination edit

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:29, 8 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Created by Juxlos (talk). Self-nominated at 10:58, 31 May 2022 (UTC).Reply

My apologies/misunderstanding, have struck my comment above.
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.
Overall:   Good to go, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 11:08, 1 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Criticism edit

I believe this article would better serve the reader if it directly quoted the primary sources, rather than fobbed the reader off to another source to find those passages. Doing this is not citing primary sources, it's helping the reader to go beyond the article for further information. -- llywrch (talk) 21:51, 11 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Technically, Tacitus & co. are secondary sources - none of them were alive at 33 AD. Juxlos (talk) 11:10, 13 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
Technically you are right. But if you wrote an article based entirely on Tacitus, Suetonius & Cassius Dio, other Wikipedians would criticize the article for relying too much on primary sources. -- llywrch (talk) 22:18, 27 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
Blame the Romans for not having published an Imperial Journal of Finance by 33 AD. Juxlos (talk) 02:52, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Reply