Talk:Roman villa

Can I link my own site?
I have a site with description and photos from two of the roman sites listed here, but not linked.

http://sights.seindal.dk/sight/901_Hadrians_Villa.html
 * Hadrian's villa at Tivoli, Italy

http://sights.seindal.dk/sight/456_Villa_Romana_del_Casale.html
 * Villa Romana del Casale in Piazza Armerina, Sicily, Italy.

I'm not sure, though, whether it would be appropriate to link them from here.

They do supply information not found here, but I'd be promoting my own site.

--Seindal 10:08, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

"The villas of the wealthy were usually surrrounded by gardens."
This, true for pleasure villas in Italy, has been added to the section on Roman villas in Britain. Has any evidence of a Romano-British garden been detected surrounding a villa? Fishbourne?--Wetman 22:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, Fishbourne has a garden with box-hedges. I don't think the current display "surrounds" the house, though. Vignaux 00:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


 * To be quite clear, you do mean archaeological evidence at Fishbourne for a garden, outside the enclosure, with boxwood hedges? The Fishbourne garden inside the enclosure, like a large atrium garden, is a well-known detail there, and quite a different matter, nts. Otherwise one might say ""The villas of the wealthy usually surrrounded an atrium garden." --Wetman — Preceding undated comment added 05:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


 * You are correct. It appears to be surrounded by buildings if not within one very large building. Vignaux 09:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


 * ...I'll change it to make reference to a peristyle garden. --Wetman 08:30, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Fishbourne is not a villa. It is a Roman Palace. --Wallamanage — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.122.108.144 (talk) 14:40, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Fishbourne
Fishbourne is not a roman villa. It is a Roman Palace. I am therefore changing this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.122.108.144 (talk) 14:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


 * An anonymous idiot. --Wetman 18:38, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The information contained in the assertion "Fishbourne is not a villa. It is a Roman Palace." may be restated with equal propriety as "Fishbourne is so fabulous I'm calling it a 'palace'". There is no indication that Fishbourne was a seat of administration. It is a very luxurious villa, needless to interate.--Wetman (talk) 05:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Go there. All the staff will happily inform you that it was and is a Roman Palace not a Villa. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.116.135 (talk) 20:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Article quality is low
This article rambles and repeats itself, and presents conflicting information. For example, at the top we're told that Pliny says a villa urbana is a villa easily reached from rome, while a villa rustica is farther out in the boondocks. Later, under the Architecture of the Villa Complex section, we're told that a villa urbana and a villa rustica are all parts of the same villa--with the urbana being the family household, and the rustica being for the servants. Additionally, there are two Architecture sections, the first of which says more about history and almost nothing about architecture, and the second of which gives factually contradictory information. I'm no expert on Roman Architecture, but this article needs some serious cleanup. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.86.217.230 (talk) 16:33, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Infobox
Template:Infobox should not be used directly. Use appropriate infobox or remove it. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:24, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Villas in Gaul
It makes no sense to have a section on this narrow topic when a reference to this topic on another wiki page is sufficient and villas elsewhere are ignored Rjdeadly (talk) 13:27, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Not sure why edits reverted
A lead doesn't need a "reference" WP:LEAD (by this I assume you mean a citation) if the article body has been referenced, which I just did. Besides this, not sure why its undue? This seems a highly subjective argument, what's wrong with including the main sites of extravagant villas, and noting their "diverse economic operations" is also helpful. Why do you think this its not? @Rjdeadly Danial Bass (talk) 08:51, 17 August 2023 (UTC)


 * As WP:Lead states, it ......."should stand on its own as a concise overview of the article's topic". Your proposed text gives far too much weight to the minority of extravagant villas. It also mentioned some areas that don't represent the whole; there were at least as many big villas in other areas, e.g Italy in general.Rjdeadly (talk) 22:25, 17 August 2023 (UTC)