Talk:Romanitas

I've just reverted SimonP's unexplained revert. If there's a reason for replacing a live external link with a dead internal one, then we can do so, but I'm always inclined to revert unexplained reverts unless there's an obvious reason (such as vandalism). Mel Etitis ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 19:34, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia policy is to always use internal links when the subject might eventually have an article, even if we don't currently. - SimonP 22:13, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * OK (though blind following of policy is less useful than careful consideration of what makes an article better) &mdash; but would it still not be courteous, first, to explain rather than just reverting, and secondly, to add the external link to the end of the article? I've now done that. Mel Etitis ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 22:50, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * This article needs to make clear the distinction between "Romanitas" and "Greco-Roman". Romanitas refered to a seperate though overlapping culture from the Greco-Roman civilization of the empire. The first was defined by a definite "Latinness" while the second by a definite "Greekness". Colossus 14:11, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Need for move back to Romanitas
The article must be moved back to correct Latin term Romanitas (Romanità is Italian for Romanitas; not plural as the editor who moved the article to Romanità beleived). --Gonda Attila (talk) 13:05, 30 January 2012 (UTC)