Talk:Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum

Missing section

To identify inscriptions, this is a great tool: http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/epikl_es.php --Alatius (talk) 18:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Another missing section

Maybe we could create subcategories to contain all the inscriptions of each book of CIL. --TcfkaPanairjdde (talk) 10:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

sucategorías

En el CIL, las inscripciones de cada volumen están ordenadas por provincias y por civitates, por lo que, en la práctica, podríamos abrir tantas subcategorías como tiene cada volumen del CIL; el incoveniente es que commons contine muy pocas inscripciones actualmente (tenemos noticas de unas 50000 inscripciones latinas romanas y levemente posteriores, de las que se conservan unas 35000), por lo que no me parece aconsejable, de momento, abrir esas subcategorías.--scutum (talk) 11:35, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Currently there are about 500 inscriptions on Commons; I am not aware of another page with so many images without a categorisation. --TcfkaPanairjdde (talk) 14:09, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Por mi de acuerdo, pero en ese caso habría que segregar a una página aparte las inscripciones identificadas en otros catálogos -Anée Epigraphique, Ephemeris Epigraphica...- y las no identificadas con otro catálogo. --scutum (talk) 07:54, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Tool

The tool mentioned above is already available in German wikipedia for CIL and L’Année épigraphique, in Italian (CIL, AE). Could we maybe adapt the English Versions (CIL, AE) for use on commons? --Haselburg-müller (talk) 01:35, 2 February 2010 (UTC) Me parece perfecto, por lo que puede crearse las páginas específicas de cada volumen del CIL y la correspondiente al AE. Complementariamente, debería crearse una categoría general referida a inscripciones latinas del mundo Romano , p. ej. Inscriptiones latinae Romanae. Un cordial saludo --scutum (talk) 08:39, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

The template: Template:CIL. Lord Hidelan

Nice work and a useful tool. Thank you! ...and this is how it works! --Haselburg-müller (talk) 18:50, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I belive that will be important to create a common procedure to use this template before to insert it inside the CIL images. Maybe a template like template:Painting or similar. --Lord Hidelan

The template: Template:AE. Lord Hidelan

collecting photographs...

I really appreciate the work done here. I'd estimate my part as a collector in my region and really enjoy hunting every available roman inscription here. Nice to see, if one of my pictures is used in another language-version, if not, many inscriptions are stored here. Still, something could be improved. We need more really important inscriptions of the roman empire that can easily illustrate articles in every language Version. For example the Senatus consultum de Gnaeo Pisone patre (AE 1996·00885), Les Cadastres d'Orange, the law of the flamen provinciae at Narbo (CIL XII, 06038), many of the inscriptions at Pompeii and Rome and we still lack many monumental inscriptions. Getting one of these in front of your lense would really be a big loot. I believe collecting all of the smaller inscriptions is a useful work. Some highlights could make the work more interesting. --Haselburg-müller (talk) 13:48, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Huge

This page is getting REALLY huge. Isn't it a good idea to subdivide it into several pages, each containing a single CIL section? Kleuske (talk) 13:58, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes it isRossignol Benoît (talk) 09:19, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok. Let's call that consensus. Kleuske (talk) 12:17, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

La subdivisión en varias páginas por volúmenes del CIL, del AE, de los otros catálogos y de las no identificadas es más que necesaria. --scutum (talk) 12:20, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok... My spanish is not that good "no habla espanol", but i take "es más que necesaria" tomean "more than neccesary". Babelfisg, in it's own convuluted way, seems to second that... Kleuske (talk) 10:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Some news

Coming Soon from Arachne: Digitized Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (CIL) --Codrin.B (talk) 17:43, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Image missing

Am i alone in thinking that this is f*cking ludicrous? In between a thousand "missing images" there is exactly one to be found and you have to scroll quite a bit to find it. If the object of pages is to make images easily accessible, this is counterproductive. I already protested this cause of action on the creators TP, but got no sensible response. Kleuske (talk) 17:52, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

A mi también me parece poco práctico. Es aceptable subdividir la categoría CIL XII y CIL XII en varias subcategorías porque el número de imágenes era elevado, pero colocar una casilla para cada inscripción recogida en el CIL es un absurdo proque muchas inscripciones están perdidas y no existe fotografía y, muy posiblemente, no existirá en el futuro, y, además, la página es poco utilizable en este estado. Sugiero eliminar las casillas vacias y volver a colocar las fotografías que tenemos de manera correlativa e ir añadiendo correlativamente las que puedan añadirse en el futuro

Atentamente --scutum (talk) 11:52, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

As I explained, I tried to create a frame to add pictures of all CIL references. Myself, I'm adding step by step pictures frome CIL XIII 1650 to CIL XIII 2445 correponding to inscriptions found in Lyon (France) and Rhône department. For the moment I added 110 pictures for about 800 references. I have more than 100 to add in the next few days. I planned to contact both museums in Lyon and Saint-Romain-en-Gal to take pictures of inscriptions not opened to public with a positive answer expected. Thus, I think It's really important to create a movment to make people go to museums, write letters or mail to museums to illustraite these lists, as I do. Nonopoly (talk) 12:13, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Una excelente idea y en mi ámbito de competencia, España, ya lo hago, pero hay un pequeño problema irresoluble ¿qué hacemos con las inscripciones referenciadas en el CIL y no conservadas actualmente? ¿Dejamos el espacio en blanco y dificultamos enormemente la consulta de las imágenes? Creo que ello es absurdo. Atentamente --scutum (talk) 12:23, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

We have the same problem here in Lyon, some of the inscriptions are lost, but some of them have been drawn by drawers when they have been discovered. Some of them are totaly lost (burned, destroyed, etc.) and the only remains of them are the text in some books. Of course, for these, no photography will be ever available. But how many inscriptions does it represent ? 1% ? 5%, 10% ? As far as I know, for Lyon, perhaps between 1 and 5 %...not that much. Perhaps in Spain or elsewhere, it's different (probably in Italy). But what I want to do, is to try to promote pictures under licence if it's possible. The empty cases just show what to do, where to surch, how long the job is...I know, but I think, now, it's not practicle, but it can be, in the future. Nonopoly (talk) 12:44, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

@ Kleuske : I remind you that categories are available. If you look for a special reference in book XII, you search in Category:Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum - volume XII. Nonopoly (talk) 12:47, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Categories are not the problem. The problem is 999 "missing images" and one image on a page, which does not make it easy to peruse that page. Kleuske (talk) 12:50, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Ach... Dan schrijf ik gewoon nederlands en verwacht van de rest dat ze me wel begrijpen. Dt houdt de discussie tenminste begrijpelijk. Kleuske (talk) 12:50, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you to write in your own language....Oh ... Then I write just Dutch and expects the rest that they understand me. Dt keeps the discussion at least understandable. (google translate)... I know that the missing imagesfor the moment is the problem. When I created pages correponding to CIL XIII, the were 100 picture and no category in the previous page (erased since then). Now, there are more than 400 pictures and 300 categories. And I just started the job. So, if everybody works in the way, the frame I created is essential. Before I couldn't find anything. Now, you know where to look for and what to do. Isn't it better ??? Nonopoly (talk) 13:01, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

It's not a probem for the moment its a problem for the foreseeable future and worse it's being replicated on other CIL-pages without consensus, without consultation. Your approach pages (worse than) useless, since usefull information is renderd virtually inaccesible. It's like a museum containing one painting and 999 places with stickers saying "missing painting". Do you expect any visitors in such a museum? 400 pictures in 300 categories is equally ludicrous, but that's not the issue being addressed. Kleuske (talk) 14:34, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

(Quito sangrías)Buenas noches: Le sugiero que coja el volumen XII del CIL y lo compare con los 4 volumenes de Les Inscriptions latines d'Aquitaine publicados por Ausonius editions à Bordeaux, en française, et vous pouvez voir que bon nombre d'inscripcions sont perdues. A l'Espagne et le Portugal au moins le 35 % d'inscriptions sont perdues. Esto significa, como le indica Kleuske, que puede tener páginas completas con solamente dos, tres o cinco imágenes y el resto no puede ser completado. Es cierto que de vez en cuando reaparece una inscripción perdida en un museo -a mi me ha ocurrido y he republicado con fotografía una inscripción de este tipo, mejorando la lectura respecto a la de Hübner del siglo XIX-, un edificio, unas ruinas o cualquier otro sitio, pero muchas inscripciones están perdidas. No sé si entiende la magnitud del problema: Conocemos unas 165.000 inscripciones latinas de época romana, excluyendo instrumenta domestica, y creemos que no conservamos por lo menos un 35 % ¡¡¡unas 50.000 inscripciones!!! ¿Está dispuesto a dejar páginas con un 30 % de huecos irrellenables? Sigue pareciéndome un absurdo.

Atentamente --scutum (talk) 19:41, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Helemaal mee eens. En bitte make up your mind quelle langue je wilt benutzen. Muito obrigada. Kleuske (talk) 21:36, 5 December 2012 (UTC)