Talk:Sub rosa

A ròzsa alatt

The paragrapgh:

“ In 1670, in the fort of Sàrospatak, Hungary (near the present Ukrainian border), members of the Wesselényi-conspiracy met to plot against the royal court in Vienna - the kingdom of Hungary being part of the Austro-Hungarian empire - in a small balcony room bearing a rose painted on the ceiling. The conspirators were ready to fight against the ruling court as they deemed the laws enacted by it unconstitutional, endangering religious and political freedom. Rákóczi Ferenc I., Nádasdy Ferenc, Zrínyi Péter, Frangepán Ferenc were present, the latter later revealing to the Austrians the details of the conspiracy. The Austrian court responded by putting the fort under siege. During the planning, several secret meetings took place in this small, secluded room. Since then, "sub rosa" has been used in the Hungarian language (in both the Latin form and the Hungarian translation, "A ròzsa alatt") meaning secrecy and a plot. For many Hungarians, this is where the expression "sub rosa" originated. ”

seems overly specific and redundant. I'm condensing it into:

“ For many Hungarians, the expression "sub rosa" originates from the time of Wesselényi conspiracy in 1670. ”

→ Aethralis 19:29, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Da Vinci Code and Popular Culture

Perhaps a brief discussion of the phrase's usage in popular culture should be mentioned. At least one, the Da Vinci Code, uses the term as a relatively important plot device. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.160.148.97 (talk) 20:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

There are many, many references to the phrase in both fiction and non-fiction. (It is, after all, a very common figure of speech). Listing the thousands of works that contain this idiom would be of great cost and little value.

174.102.235.187 (talk) 14:45, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

US Army military intelligence corps

In the US Army, the branch insignia for military intelligence includes a rose in the design. Should this be mentioned somewhere? Canine virtuoso (talk) 01:19, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

J. Edgar Hoover

I suggest that this entire section be removed. It has the feel of folk etymology. In addition, I know of no evidence that Hoover's files were ever made available to the C.I.A. Since no sources are cited, I'm wondering whether the author can document any part of it. Garrettepps (talk) 21:00, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Deletion

This article should be deleted. Wikipedia is not a dictionary and should not have entries for single words or phrases. If it remains the second section on symbolism should be removed, it is extremely poorly supported and of highly dubious relevance even to the phrase in question.125.168.48.16 (talk) 08:53, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Agree, totally.
Weeb Dingle (talk) 00:28, 6 July 2017 (UTC)