Talk:Rome (TV series)/Archive 3

Reminder!

This is not a discussion board for whether or not the show is correct in the history behind ancient Rome, nor is it a place to critque the show. Please be reminded that all discussions here should relate directly to the accuracy of the article itself. Please keep your opinions about the show to yourself, or kindly find another fan forum to do so, such as IMDb or HBO. MagnoliaSouth 14:53, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Second season and Rumours of a Third (?)

Okay, HBO has confirmed that Rome will be cancelled after season two. Does anyone disagree with correcting this portion of the article? MagnoliaSouth 07:31, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Is the use of language appropriate???

Generally I'm not one to complain re bad language, but even though this is in context, I think we need some way of filtering use of the word cunt. Just pointing out where some may complain! Also, Ancient rome is studied by smallish children, and they're gonna chuck "Rome" into google, getting this as the third result. Angry Parents+Lawyers=UHOH! Thefloogadooga (talk) 09:38, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Do not copy and paste!

If you look more closely, especially parts of those episode descriptions have been taken from HBO's website with verbally copy and paste. I do not see any specific information indicating any permissions. And even if on HBO's web site, those preview paragraphs are replaced with more elaborate versions, this could still result in a copyright issue. Please do not do this, and rewrite if neccessary.

• At first I added simpler versions but several other users began pasting the official summaries. I added taken from official site to give HBO credit. Hope that solves the problem. Sfufan2005 20:04, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure it actually does solve the problem though. You see HBO has the summaries copyrighted, which means whether or not we credit them here doesn't matter. The only way we can safely copy and paste them here is if HBO provides express written permission. Would you be interested in rewriting those summaries, by chance? I'd be willing to work with you if you like. MagnoliaSouth 15:00, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Disk Details

I've added details of which DVD disk shows what. I missed episode 8 - rather, I missed what the BBC broadcast as episode 8, but is listed here as episode 9. Wrongly supposing that there would be two episodes per disk, I put disk 4 to the top of my rental list. The rental company then sent me disks 1 and 2, so it goes.

I'll fill in extra details as I see them. Unless someone wants to do so who has all of the disks. I doubt I'm the only person who only wants to see episodes they missed.

--GwydionM 21:13, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I think you're right, but I also am not quite sure how to handle the disk information. I posted a question here (the TV project page), but have gotten no response to it yet. I think it's a good idea, but I'm not sure how to handle it.

I know that Lost was nominated, I believe, as a FA which means that they must be doing something right. Their DVD list is here, but they don't mention the full what's on what disk thing. I suppose I could make a table and then we can enter the information there. Perhaps we can even put information on the main Rome page, like what they have at Lost and then have a separate "main article" about DVD information? What do you think? MagnoliaSouth | Talk 05:46, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your contribution, Magnoliasouth. A separate page for the DVD has been is fine. --GwydionM 12:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

New episode list draft

I worked on a new draft of the episode list which follows the guidelines per {{Episode list}}. It's located here. Any comments are encouraged. Please though, don't edit it but make your suggestions for improving it first on the Talk page for it. I don't want to "break" the template. If no one comments within a few days, I'll go ahead and implement it. MagnoliaSouth | Talk 05:47, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Very well done. Must more presentable and easier to read than the current list. I think that if this was to be implemented though, analogous lists of this style should be put in place for the other tables. :) - Vedexent 06:24, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I can work on the style too for the other tables. I appreciate your feedback. :) MagnoliaSouth | Talk 09:23, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

---

I have since worked on those tables as you made a very good point on the formatting of other tables to match as well. Per your suggestion, I've been working on those too. Would you mind taking a peek at those additional tables and providing me feedback, yet again? They are now located on the same page as the original list, which in turn is located here.

Though I am hoping for any and all feedback, I also am in particular need of feedback on the multiple use of "no image" links under secondary characters. I personally don't like it and wondered if by chance you might have an idea. Should I merge the summary section for each, until a photo is found? MagnoliaSouth | Talk 07:32, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Production credits

I'm looking over this section and am not really sure why this is here. About half of the information listed is duplicated from the episode list. The other works listed, doesn't pertain at all to Rome but to the individual listed, so if someone is interested in them, they should go to their page. While I agree that artists who were part of the Rome team should be mentioned, I don't think it fits in with the article the way it is designed. Perhaps a shorter, to the point version is in order. Comments? MagnoliaSouth | Talk 07:01, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Editing (major)

If anyone is even listening, I am in the process of making major edits on the article. The article is longer than the standard article should be to begin with, so I'm creating sub-pages and moving portions of text to those. I'm also beginning to implement the table changes as well. The plan here is to create a more solid encyclopedic article, as well as provide information that many users would like to see. All the lists and tables really doesn't belong in the main article. MagnoliaSouth | Talk 10:02, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Is Roman salute ever used?

Has anybody seen legionaries in this series using the Roman salute gesture. There is some controvercy if this gesture was invented in the XVII century. Mieciu K 13:23, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

In the military context, several soldiers are shown saluting their superiors. There are a two examples in The Stolen Eagle that I could find easily enough just now: when the soldier brings Caesar news of his daughter's death and when Vorenus leaves Mark Antony after being tasked to find the eagle. The salute appears to be a closed right fist against the heart then extended palm down, thumb out parallel with the ground or slightly elevated. -Anþony 22:43, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

dead people come back to life?

I'm not completely sure about this but maybe someone could clarify this. I've been watching the Rome DVD this week and I noticed to things. After Evander (Niobe's lover) gets killed by Pullo, and Niobe and her sister are at the house in distress for a second a man walks right behind them that looks just like Evander. Also after the gladiator scene, on the beginning of the next episode (upon the reenactment at the theater) there is a close up of an old man crying near the end, the cut is confusing since most of the crowd is heard cheering at the presentation, yet the man looks a lot like the last gladiator who just got killed, only without all the makeup. Are people coming back from the dead as extras in Rome? or is my tv just small and my sight poor?

It's just an old tv trick. They've already paid the ACTOR, so re-use him as much as they can. Just because it's the same ACTOR doesn't mean he's playing the same Character

Actually, if the same actor played a different character they would have to pay him again, so my guess is that it's your eyes playing tricks. TAnthony 19:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Egypt

I seem to remember advertising somewhere for a similar show to Rome called Egypt or something, but I haven't been able to find anything about it so I'm wondering about whether maybe I was dreaming. Maybe add a section of similar kinds of tv shows?

Reference to "Gallic Wars"

I changed the following sentence:

the only two "regular soldiers" mentioned in Caesar's Commentarii de Bello Gallico.

This is not quite correct since Vorenus and Pullo in Caesar's text are centurions and thus, not rank-and-file soldiers but low-ranking oficers - and they are not the only low-ranking officers mentioned by name in the Gallic Wars: there's at least one aquilifer mentioned by name during the crossing of the Channel, and if memory serves, the aquilifer who has the idea to cut down the Venetians' sails is also mentioned by name. -- Ferkelparade π 19:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

patricians and plebians

The series summary section starts thusly:

The series is a historical drama depicting the period of history surrounding the violent transformation of the Roman Republic into the Roman Empire; a change driven by the class struggle between Patrician and Plebeian (in Latin the patricii and the plebeii)...

I haven't seen the show, so I wonder if the terms patricians and plebians are actually used therein. The two phrases denote not economic classes, but hereditary castes; while in the early days of the Roman state the patricians were rich and the plebians were poor, by Caesar's day there were plenty of wealthy plebians. The main political conflict of the period under consideration, to the extent that it could be said to be class based, were between the "populares" (populists, more or less) and "optimates" or "boni" (the best or the good). There were plebian leaders like Cicero in the optimates, generally considered the party of the rich, and patrician leaders of the populares, Caesar being the most obvious example.

Anyway, sorry to go on like this. My question is mainly if this is a mistake in the TV series or just in the article. If the former, it should be noted in the appropriate section. If the latter, it should be fixed. --Jfruh (talk) 02:30, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

There are a handful of wealthy plebeian characters, and the politics does indeed seem to center more around a populares vs. optimates conflict than a rich vs. poor conflict. I'd say the article is wrong.--24.22.147.202 23:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

This has already been corrected. TAnthony 00:08, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Trivia

Most of the trivia items were directly copied from the IMDB trivia page for this show. I've removed the copied items. Orpheus 13:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

The dispute about vocative (or lack thereof) is asinine. Why don't people greet each other as Vorene and Tite? It is silly to expect them to decline nouns, even if the terms are used almost exclusively in vocative. I would delete the portion about domina/dominus, but it would most likely be restored the next day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.91.102.185 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I've moved the entire trivia section here (see my notes below):

• Leatherwork for the principal actors was done on set by Augusto and Giampaolo Grassi, using the traditional techniques used by their father to create the leatherwork for such classic films as Cleopatra.

These individuals did apparently work on series, but I can find nothing (IMDB.com, etc) to establish that they are related to the costumers of 1963's Cleopatra. The worked on a 1999 TV version of Cleopatra, is that a source of confusion?.

• The words "domina" and "dominus" are practically the only Latin words the cast uses regularly. Nevertheless, as they are always used as vocative, the masculine form should be "domine". Moreover, the spoken Latin of the higher classes is inadequately close to ecclesiastical late Latin. The word "bene" and the greeting "salve" are also heard. Finally, many prayers to the Roman gods are uttered in the original Latin.

Original research/Not notable

• A few Italian expressions are occasionally used in dialogues (perhaps as a sort of "fake Latin"), "paisàn" , ("buddy" in the dialect of Naples), and Mark Antony is once heard saying "che brutta figura!" ("what an ugly impression" [I must have made]).

Original research/Not notable/Just dumb TAnthony 01:17, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Possible inaccuracy in the "Historical deviations" section

The very first bullet point in the section states that Egypt is inaccurately portrayed as too ancient-Egyptian. However, unlike the earlier Ptolemies, Cleopatra had a keen interest in ancient Egyptian language and culture, and did much to resurrect the waning Egyptian religion and customs. Doubtless, Egypt during her reign was still very much Hellenic, but is it possible that she "re-Egyptized" it at least to some extent? I do not have sufficient expertise in the history of antiquity to edit this portion of the article, but I believe that this is something the experts should consider. As it is, the statement in question appears facile to me. When all facts are taken into account, the degree of the show's departure from history in this regard is probably difficult to assess.Redisca 17:13, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I was the one who added that bullet point. I've since revised it to be more precise, but basically, it comes down to this: You're right in that Cleopatra was more interested in Egyptian culture than her predecessors. But that's not the big picture: The point is that in the episode, we don't see a single trace of Greek culture, when actually it should have been visible everywhere. And not in a small way. The best example is Alexandria, where most of the action takes place: It was a Greek city; meaning Greek architecture, a mostly Greek population wearing Greek costume, and a Greek-style royal palace with Greek-style guards. This is all verifiable - check out the relevant wikipedia entries if you're in doubt (many of them are linked to in the entry on the Caesarion episode). Now compare to what we see in that episode: Ancient Egyptian-style buildings and courtiers, soldiers and inhabitants wearing costumes that have no resemblance to anything historical other than Ancient Egypt (wigs etc.), and not a single hint at Greece. I don't think that makes the degree of the show's departure from history difficult to assess at all, if I may say so. Frederic Anklin 17:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd echo the point by Redisca; Cleopatra was of course Greek but was also self-consciously immersed in all things Egyptian, probably from political necessity though maybe also from a young age, and this was the image broadcast to the Romans: for example here, her worship as Isis. The show portrays Egypt from Rome's pov so it's fair that it appears v Egyptian. No reason to make it look Greek, I mean if the audience knows who the Ptolemys are, as the Romans did, there's no need to. Hakluyt bean 02:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Much of ancient (pre-Christian) Alexandria had Egyptian architecture and statuary in place. In order to make nice with the Egyptian people, many of the Ptolemys brought statues and other artwork from other parts of Egypt to Alexandria to "dress it up". Many of these "recycled" artifacts wound up under Alexandria harbor. They are now being recovered by marine archaeologists such as Jean Yves Empereur. Check out the PBS website on his recent dives [1]. Additionally, the Divernet website [2] shows several images of artifacts still in the water of Alexandria harbor, and almost all of them are classic Egyptian artifacts: sphinxes, stelae, etc. The city of Alexandria had become a hodgepodge of styles by Cleopatra VII's day. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.142.75.231 (talk) 02:36, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

The line about chain mail armor being anachronistic is incorrect. Mail is not a medieval invention. The armor called lorica hamata was chain mail and was in use before show's period. The armor made of iron strips, known as loric segmentata, was also in use at this time but is a later development than the chain mail. Mail is extremely expensive and time consuming to produce. Lorica segmentata does not prvise the same flexibility but is easier to produce. It came into use when earlier armor had been lost in great numbers and new armies were raised, such as in the reforms of Marius or after Teutoburg Forest. See Wikipedia article on mail or other book on Roman armor, such as "Warriors of Rome" by Michael Simkins 1988 KeithJonsn 13:00, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

It was recently added and obviously in correct, so I took it out. Thanks. TAnthony 20:46, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Number of episodes in Season 2

Will there only be ten episodes in season 2? Is there any good source available yet on the number of episodes?--thirty-seven 20:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed "Historical deviation"

I removed the following line from the "Historical deviations" section:

Cato is portrayed as an old man, while in history he was only in his 40s. {This is a somewhat ridiculous note. In this period, the average life expectancy for a plebian would have been around 35-40, while the upper classes could probably expect to live to perhaps 50. A man of 40 would be an 'old man'.}

Cato was 48 or 49 at the time of his death. Karl Johnson, who plays Cato, was around 56 years old when he played the role of Cato. That's not a terribly large difference. Also, as the note on the end of the of the line suggests, differences in life expectancy and living conditions would likely account for the difference between the charcter's appearance and how modern people from industrialized countries would expect a man in his late 40s to look. If anyone disagrees with this, feel free to do so. Thanks. Jim Campbell 00:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Could someone remove the line that 'there is no mention of the Battle of Dyrrachium,' while not mentioned by name, the series clearly alludes to it by putting the words into the mouth of Pompey; 'stike, we've already struck.' Apologies as to the lack of User cert.

Created by

Removed a note that said the project was mostly developed by a British cast and crew. First off, casts have next to nothing to do with the actual development of a TV show like this (ie, no stars). Second, John Millius and William J. MacDonald are both Americans, while Bruno Heller has lived in Los Angeles for 10 years (this is the trio that created and developed the show) RoyBatty42 19:32, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

historical deviation - fighting techniques

Battle scenes in Rome depict Roman infantry fighting techniques including the tightly-packed "Roman Wall" of shields, gladius thrusting techniques above and below the "shield wall", and the rotation of troops on the front lines every 1 to 2 minutes. These techniques are largely conjectural, as we have no such detailed descriptions surviving to us. However, they are possible considering Roman ingenuity and the need to replenish the front ranks during times of intense combat. Rotation of troops is unlikely to have taken place as frequently as 1 to 2 minutes, however.

I was wondering if it's considered unlikely to have been 1 or 2 min rotations (and I don't know whose opinion this is) then why did the programme-makers give that impression? Also the bit about 'Roman ingenuity' I'd replace; it's common sense + a number of things: different culture (celtic tribes had a warrior culture which extolled the individual, and 'pound for pound' are commonly regarded to have been bigger and better, but this didn't lend itelf to co-ordinated tactics) sharp sense of patriotism (celtic peoples lacked this), virtue of group discipline - it's a big subject. Hakluyt bean 02:53, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

It's mentioned that the earliest European fighting manual is I33, but there are many depictions in mosaic and stone form of legionary combat aren't there? EG Trajans column? Atillashardermate 10:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

On that last point, Vegetius' De Re Militaris is a late Roman treatise which among other things gives details of the old legionary training methods and fighting techniques. The use of the sword to stab rather than slash in the series' depiction of combat is straight out of Vegetius. See http://www.pvv.ntnu.no/~madsb/home/war/vegetius/dere03.php#07 85.211.0.104 (talk) 02:53, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

The Skull on a Wheel Mosiac

What God(s) are the Skull on the Wheel Mosiac connected to? It is the very first image shown in the opening credits, and appears time to time in the series. I remember it at Pompeys military camp; so I assumed it may be Mars. I've looked on Wikipedia under Skulls symoblism and Deathshead but can find nothing, so someone could add them to one of those. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.63.200.178 (talk) 04:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC).

It sounds like 'a skull sur-mounted by an alpha (letter A) and resting on a wheel' which according to a jstor article which I cannot read in full atm describes a mosaic apparently found at Pompeii. Fortuna Populi Romani ( Fortuna ) I think it's meant to be. Skull mortality, butterfly soul, wheel of fortune. Someone should find out from the programme-makers tho before it goes in the article.

edit - ok, forget jstor, who won't let me read their articles for any price, so far as I can tell. This is actually the mosaic here.

naturalistic depiction of a skull and the tools of a mason, expresses allegorically the transience of life and the impending nature of death. It is the libella, the level, from which hangs the plumb-line -the instrument that serves to control the levelling of a construction- that symbolises all equality: from its ends hang in perfect equilibrium the symbols of power (the sceptre and the royal purple) and on the right, the sack and the stick, symbols of poverty.

So now we know :)

edit 2 - big pic here, from this page on Pompeian mosaics Hakluyt bean 00:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

No Season 3

• According to this article at the New Yorker there will be no Season 3. So be sure to complain at www.HBOcom/rome --Neilrieck 12:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

If you noticed, the last episode was also called the "Series Finale" --67.175.193.148 05:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Attention Rome Fans

I recommend heeding the above advice, click here and voice your opinion on a third season. It's not often we get good historical dramas, especially period pieces so purpose built and extravagant! Let's push them to keep it coming.  :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 211.30.75.123 (talk) 04:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

Good idea, but why everytime we see the TV series or movies about Rome, they are about the history since Caesar or after him, the history about Roman Republic before him is not so attractive as a subject matter of TV or movie? ——Nussknacker胡桃夹子^.^tell me... 09:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

We love the idea of 1 man who changes all. before caesar there was only hannibal who one his one threatened rome and the republic, like there aren't movies about that. 81.69.203.77 06:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed this is one of the few good historical dramas, so we better stop at its peak so it is not to going to become lame with 10 seasons. Mallerd 21:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

For those of you worried about the TV show ending, there are plans to make a film of Robert Graves I, Claudius. This recounts the internecine plots and counterplots surrounding Claudius, the fourth emperor of Rome, who ruled from 41-54 AD. The novel's period covers the time from the end of the first Emperor Augustus' reign to the crowning of Nero. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.176.166.228 (talk) 11:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

controversy

Different edits don't necessarily mean controversy, even if not everyone is happy. Particularly the RAI edit, where I don't think there can have been any expectation of showing all the sex and nudity. In that sense the edit is 'normal' rather than 'controversial'. Hakluyt bean 12:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Why does Cato Jr. always wear a black robe?

Does that mean that he has a special status or something else in the Senate? It makes him conspicuous in the Senate while the others wear the white ones. ——Nussknacker胡桃夹子^.^tell me... 09:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

veni vidi vici

Some important events are not mentioned in Rome, including Caesar's campaign against King Pharnaces of Cimmeria (the campaign which spawned the famous saying Veni, Vidi, Vici)

this IS mentioned, Caesar is holding a party where he says the people of Pontus are weak and it was no wonder Pompei defeated them so easily.

so it is mentioned 81.69.203.77 06:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC) Mallerd 07:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Mourning the Republic

That is a good question! He is wearing a black robe to mourn the Republic. He believes the Republic is lost with the “tyrant” Caesar in power. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skatter heart79 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Cast and characters

Is the table comparing Cast and characters between the two seasons really necessary? As far as I can tell there is only one character who is portrayed by different actors, and it just seems to be taking up space unnecessarily.

I think the point was differentiating between characters that don't appear in both seasons. TAnthony 03:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale

The following images were tagged for not having a fair use rationale; I have added one to each image, removed the tags, and cleaned up the alerts on this talk page.

• Image:Ep12.jpg
• Image:Ep11.jpg
• Image:Ep10.jpg
• Image:Ep09.jpg
• Image:Ep05.jpg
• Image:Ep04.jpg
• Image:Ep02rome.jpg

Please let me know if I have not followed protocol. TAnthony 05:40, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Did RAI truely involved in the production?

As the title says.--JSH-alive 06:29, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes. This was announced far and wide in Italian media, but very sparingly in the US and UK. See [3] for one of the few examples where the three-way coproduction is mentioned. It is also discussed here: [4] (this latter link also discusses how the series flopped in Italy). Still, both the BBC and HBO official websites state that the series was a coproduction between the two of them alone. (The official Italian website of the fiction on the RAI server [5] obviously disagrees and actually discusses the three-way production extensively.) Methinks this divergence should be mentioned somewhere in the article. --Nehwyn 08:43, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

fighting inaccuracies

deleted this: "The use of whistles rather than trumpets for signals, however, is anachronistic." my reason being that jonathan stamp asserts trumpets were used for large-scale communication while whistles were used in the small group.

also, this entire paragraph seems unnecessary or out of place. given that there are only 2 or 3 battles in the entire series, why include this kind of nitpicking in the section on major deviations? indeed, the fighting is not strictly an "inaccuracy" in that, lacking evidence, neither the series creators nor the wikipedia author know exactly how accurate or inaccurate Rome's portrayal was. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.176.10.218 (talk) 21:11:18, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

Image removals

Videmus Omnia (who tagged the article) is correct that the use of non-free/fair use images in inappropriate for lists, per Wikipedia:Non-free content#Unacceptable images. I am removing them from the episode lists, but they still appear in the appropriate individual episode articles. TAnthony 21:48, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Intro music.

There is nothing about the intro music for the sure, who made it or created it. Thought that should be in the article. Govvy 12:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Broadcasting

I've created the (horribly named) List of broadcasting data for Rome (TV series) to preserve the info deleted here pending a discussion on its value and what may be done with it. I supposed the issue should be discussed on the list's talk page. — TAnthony^Talk 00:28, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

• I've subsequently listed that page for deletion because it violates WP:DIRECTORY. See the AFD listing here. -- Wikipedical 01:04, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Filming

You could say something about filming techniques, such as the public crier acting as a narrator (something is said in the list of minor characters) or the dark indoors scenes, presumedly corresponding to the lack of cheap efficient illumination of the period. --Error (talk) 02:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Commentary like that is tricky without sources, meaning that someone outside Wikipedia needs to have published such analysis in, say, a magazine or reliable website. If you know of some, by all means guide us there and someone will add this info to the article. — TAnthony^Talk 02:52, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Merge

Support -- John (Daytona2 · Talk · Contribs) 18:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Support -- Why is there even a separate article created for the DVDs in the first place? ~ Brother William (talk) 13:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Uppose Only needs to be cleaned up. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 20:24, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Support -- The article is at the lower end of the size range, so the addition of the DVD information would not make it unwieldy. While I wish the series ran for more seasons, it didn't, and thus there is no need for as many sub articles.Seaphoto^Talk 06:39, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Inaccuracies and references

In most of the episode articles a list with inaccuracies or mistakes is given. Most of the historical inaccuracies do however not refer to any history book. I think this is as important as references in any other article on history. TJR Lanjouw (talk) 12:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Please Upload this image for me

Can someone upload this image for me. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Rome-Complete-Seasons-Kenneth-Cranham/dp/B000UOOVDI/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1215900793&sr=1-3 --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 22:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Redundant list

Be Black Hole Sun has created Rome (season 1), a list which is redundant of List of Rome episodes and also includes redundant award/nomination information copied from this main article. The editor insists this new list is "needed" and "supposed to exist" because Stargate SG-1 and other series have such "season" articles/lists. I have redirected the new list purely for the sake of its redundancy, but Be Black Hole Sun maintains that the new list is needed. I have tried to explain that in the case of Rome, there are a finite number of episodes, and the existing list is not so large or cumbersome as to need to be split itself. The new list has no additional information that, if merged into the existing list, would make it too large or cumbersome. Stargate SG-1, by comparison, is a series with many seasons and many episodes, and the additional information included in each "season" article would make the already-overblown List of Stargate SG-1 episodes completely unmanageable (though I actually think most of the Stargate season articles are themselves somewhat redundant and lacking in additional information). Despite Be Black Hole Sun's assertion here that I am the "the only person which has anything against this," I believe I'm simply the only person who has noticed Rome (season 1) thus far. I'd appreciate other editors weighing in on the issue. — TAnthony^Talk 02:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree, with only two seasons, a breakdown for each individual season on top of a very manageable list for the entire series seems redundant. Even a redirect seems unnecessary, but if needed for conformity, then OK Seaphoto^Talk 06:33, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Did Rome won BAFTA in 2008?

According to http://www.bafta.org/awards/television/latest-winners-and-nominees,91,BA.html , the winner is "the Street" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Athos.jingle (talk • contribs) 12:56, 29 January 2009 (UTC)