Talk:Alesia (city)

Duplicate
In the small section, 'Early doubts', appears this statement: '...claimed it was in Franche-Comté or around Salins-les-Bains in Jura.' The Départment of Jura is a component of the region of Franche-Comté, so the use of the word 'OR' is superfluous.

Where is it?
Interestingly, this article makes no attempt to even remotely place the location of Alesia in modern France. "Somewhere near modern Paris" or some such thing would be rather useful. A map doubly so. Even if it's location isn't precisely known, I would have to assume there's a good enough idea of its approximate location to be able to provide readers with an idea of roughly where it was at. RobertM525 08:15, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * i guess the current statements ("There have been archeological excavations since the time of Napoléon III in Alise-Sainte-Reine in Côte d'Or near Dijon, which have claimed that the historical Alesia is located there. New discoveries are constantly being made about this Gallo-Roman settlement on the plateau of Mont-Auxois") answer your query? -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 23:42, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

oppidum
Should i undo revision 306508535 by 173.79.191.200 (talk)? Following the link, i can read "Oppidum (plural oppida) is a Latin word meaning the main settlement in any administrative area of ancient Rome." Therefore, the current version is like having "Rome is a settlement (City) in Italy." - what's the point of the capital 'C'? -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 23:42, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hmm, it sounds like the oppidum article could so with some work as the oppidum of Manching was never in an "administrative area of ancient Rome". Anyway, "oppidum" is not a proper noun and should not be capitalised so I have reverted the edit. Nev1 (talk) 23:46, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

‘shows the weakness’
What weakness? The text doesn't refer to it even once. Was it historically significant or something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.114.147.138 (talk) 17:07, 17 March 2016 (UTC)