Talk:Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi (consul 133 BC)

Disambiguation?

A search for "Calpurnius Piso" leads to this page. Arguably, a more famous Calpurnius Piso than the consul of 133 BC is the father-in-law of Julius Caesar, who is also a likely search topic because of archaeological interest (his presumed villa in Herculaneum) and patronage of the Epicurean Philodemus. There is not even an acknowledgment at the top of the page that a user might be looking for one of the many other Romans by this name. I wonder whether a disambiguation page might not be appropriate. Cynwolfe (talk) 18:47, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus at this time, although a future move to Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi (historian) seems to make sense. Without a primary topic, the prosopography article Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi serves as a dab page. Miniapolis 21:35, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

---

Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi (consul 133 BC) → Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi – This person is a historical figure who was consul for a time, normally the highest office in the Roman Republic, and has a few other claims to notability, he is the primary meaning. The only other person of this name is a figure of doubtful historicity who is only mentioned in one dubious source, I have some doubts if he should have an article at all, but if he does he should be treated as a hatnote. PatGallacher (talk) 00:04, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Support per WP:2DABS. —Srnec (talk) 01:41, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose, gently. This is perfectly sound reasoning that I would normally support, but I checked Broughton's MRR, and there are two additional Lucii Calpurnii Pisones who have the agnomen Frugi during the Roman Republic and who are notable enough for a "multiple-Romans" page to sort them. So Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi is needed for that prosopography page. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:58, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Reply Firstly, we need to see these articles to judge their notability. Secondly, even if they are notable, we still might decide that this person is the primary meaning. Sometimes we have to judge things on the articles we have, not hypothetical articles. PatGallacher (talk) 00:23, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
    • No, I'm saying that Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi already exists as a prosopography page. It isn't a dab. The point is precisely that these individuals won't necessarily sustain independent articles. We have several of these at Category:Articles about multiple people in ancient Rome, though many still languish as dabs in need of revision and aren't categorized there yet. Lucius Valerius Flaccus is a prime example of why such pages are needed (though it's a bit disorganized). The list in question here just has fewer members; a nearer comparison is Marcus Claudius Marcellus Aeserninus. These can serve as incubators for possible articles, but their main purpose is to aid readers looking up a name by providing basic info on several easily confused figures, some of whom are too minor for independent notability. In part because of the difficulties of Roman nomenclature (so many people having the same name, which results from the importance of family lineage in Rome), prosopography is important to Rome in a way it may not be for other cultures.[1] That's why these kinds of pages developed. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:03, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
• Support, this being the only article with this name. --BDD (talk) 05:31, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

No, a sourced prosopography list exists at Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi. These prosopography lists are used to help readers sort through identically named Romans who are documented in the historical record and have some historical significance, but about whom not enough is known to compile an independent article. What would you do with the existing content at Lucius Calpurnius Piso? Cynwolfe (talk) 21:18, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid I read this too quickly, missing the existence of Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi (usurper). We can simplify this page's name to Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi (consul), but without some statistics, I'm unwilling to back a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC just because the other guy may be legendary. Oppose for now. --BDD (talk) 22:46, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

• Although it's usual to disambiguate with highest office held, another option exists for this figure: (historian). He appears regularly in literary histories, and is arguably more notable as a writer than as a consul. Just throwing that out. Cynwolfe (talk) 13:55, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

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