Jump to content

Talk:Elagabalus

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured articleElagabalus is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 16, 2008.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 4, 2005Featured article candidatePromoted
September 17, 2007Featured article reviewKept
January 21, 2021Featured article reviewDemoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 11, 2011, March 11, 2013, March 11, 2015, March 11, 2018, March 11, 2021, and March 11, 2022.
Current status: Former featured article

Please read this before requesting a change regarding gender identity

[edit]

The gender identity of Elagabalus is a contentious topic and has been raised here before. The most radical claim — that Elagabalus claimed to be a woman and wanted confirming surgery — came from a historian who was also a public official, and answered to the same people who condemned Elagabalus's memory. This article follows the prevailing approach of scholarship by regarding those claims skeptically and thus uses masculine pronouns.

Before requesting a change related to this topic, please review the talk page archives. These are available through the header at the top of this page, which is visible only on large-screen devices. 67.180.143.89 (talk) 18:18, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Beard

[edit]

I see that Professor Mary Beard, in her BBC programme Mary Beard's Ultimate Rome: Empire Without Limit, largely attributes the questions over Elagabalus's gender identity to later historical propaganda. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:20, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 January 2025

[edit]

Incorrect pronouns.

went by she/her for the majority of her life. Thisisabuckettf2 (talk) 01:58, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Misuse of edit-request for a controversial change. Please read the archives. There is a consensus among historians that this is false. Mr rnddude (talk) 02:02, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is that user's first ever edit, I wouldn't say that they're purposefully "misusing" the edit request system, they could be confused about how it works and that controversial changes must first have consensus. But yeah, Mr rnddude is right, and @Thisisabuckettf2, you should check the archives to see how this request is controversial and what the consensus of historians is on the pronouns for referring to this emperor. Fathoms Below (talk) 20:44, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]