Talk:Roman navy

Removal of copyrighted work
I removed a large portion of good text, because it was copyed from a copyrigthted website, and there was no copyright statement. The original source was: [http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:sNsGuAhk_sAJ:www.webadept.net/dragons/index.php%3Fid%cheese28 November 2005 (UTC)

Only when the Germanic force set off for the interior Claudius Gothicus could defeat them.
Only when the Germanic force set off for the interior Claudius Gothicus could defeat them?

Only under Caesar Constantius Chlorus the navy was again able to deliver troops to Britannia?

Word meaning confusion
I'm a Latin student, and I know that Concordia means "Harmony," not "Trust." I fixed it.

Wakata *unregistered user hooray*

Moved 'additional citations' label
I moved the 'additional citations needed' label to the Notes section. I didn't see any discussion on the Talk page about why it was needed, and compared to many Wikipedia articles, this one is pretty solidly referenced. It's my opinion (probably a minority one) that labels belong at the top only when innocent readers need to be alerted to incoherent, misleading, or just badly researched articles. I think it would be more helpful for the person who added the label to explain why (here in a talk section), and not scare users away from reading an article that on admittedly cursory inspection seems constructed with care. If there are points here and there that need verified, again I think the judicious use of would be more helpful to those who have clearly put some time and thought into this page. Cynwolfe (talk) 13:58, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Roman *ships* ??
Now that 'Roman ships' have been redirected to Roman navy, where do we put articles about Roman ships, shipbuilding techniques, trade, civilian and pleasure craft, merchantmen, economics, and all the other subtopics that don't particularly have anything to do with the Roman navy? Where do I find a base to start looking for articles about particular Roman shipwrecks? It's confusing trying to find them when every marine topic to do with ancient Rome is somehow connected to their navy and empire-building. Monado (talk) 07:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * As far as I can tell, the redirect is not about every marine topic related to Rome having to do with the navy, it is simply that there was no real article at Roman ships in the first place, so it only makes sense for it to be redirected here, where there is at least some info on warships. Wikipedia is unfortunately missing a lot of information on ancient maritime history, but you can always fix it yourself, if you have the necessary knowledge. Just keep in mind that these ships, shipwrecks, marine economics etc were not necessarily exclusively "Roman", but rather "Mediterranean".Constantine  ✍  08:47, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm tempted to redirect to Roman commerce, instead, unless someone can offer a better suggestion. Ananiujitha (talk) 17:45, 17 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I'll add my irritation at looking for Roman ships and being directed to Roman Navy. We need an article about Roman ships. What I know about ships can be put in a thimble, but maybe I'll take it on anyway.Smallchief  (talk) 11:34, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

This local law enforcement's, Commonwealth Attorney Building, Lawyer's, and other's involved knowing accessercy after murders kill Navy Seal.
Please send a a u.s. coast fraud to that polygraph,and other testing.They still trying to kill me.Irvin Roger Craig Jr￼ 2601:5C6:C202:9E60:31AB:6FA5:4CC6:FEB9 (talk) 20:08, 14 April 2023 (UTC)