Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lucius Caecilius Iucundus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was Tenendum est, designatione revocata, nullo suffragio deletionis. - Smerdis of Tlön 18:43, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subjectus de articulus anti-notabilis est - CrazyRussian talk/email 12:38, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Io concedo. - CrazyRussian talk/email 15:02, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. The house of Caecilius does actually exist in Pompeii, and as Caecilius is the subject of Cambridge Latin Course book 1, he seems fairly notable to me. SchuminWeb (Talk) 12:40, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I was under the impression this is about the person, not the character. Having possessed a house is not a criterion of notability! - CrazyRussian talk/email 12:44, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- [www.cafepress.com/caecilius istum] atque istum atque istum atque istum atque istum videte legiteque! Uncle G 13:02, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Tene Civis Pompeiianus notabilis. Fan-1967 13:10, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Eepkay erpay aboveway. PJM 13:23, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- JAODNBAY! - CrazyRussian talk/email 14:41, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Teneatur! Nomen notum duo mille annis post mortem. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Veritas est! Puncto bene. - CrazyRussian talk/email 14:56, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.