Talk:Consular tribune

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.

Military history: Roman & Byzantine

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Roman and Byzantine military history task force

Needs more refs Suggestion edit

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article relies heavily on the a single work (Forsyth's) which is idiosyncratic in several viewpoints. It could use other sources, e.g., Cornell, Lintott. - Eponymous-Archon (talk) 02:57, 13 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Re recent reverts edit

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I reverted some edits from an IP. This was for the following reasons.

The paragraph with the incipit "Modern scholars" interjected into the Traditional account section is both duplication of the same paragraph I wrote later in Re-evaluation but also was done so without citing sources.
Some paragraphs were written which were wholly unsourced while overwriting sourced material. The new version also was wrong: there were never two consular tribunes elected.

I also added some stuff from Lomas' 2018 book, which provides a decent handling of the topic from a modern perspective. Ifly6 (talk) 15:47, 29 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add topic