Wikipedia - Page 3

MyCatIsFat · 05-16-2008, 01:37 PM

Fact: On major topics, wikipedia is just as accurate as any major encyclopedia in print.

Titus001 · 01:44 PM

The Roman empire wiki source was legit until someone had to edit the "fall" date. It was perfect with 27BC-1453AD. Some turd edited the date to 476AD. That is the correct date of the fall of the western side of the empire but the eastern Roman empire continued for another 1,000 years. I added my complaints to this wrong edit of history!
What, If Anything, Is A Byzantine?

As you can see we have many disagreements.

Roman Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is what I said in the edit wiki page for the roman empire.

Whoever is changing the fall of the Roman empire to 1453 AD please keep it up. No need for the outdated date of 476AD when the eastern side survived for another 1000 years and continued to call themselves ROMAN! Byzantines= Romans. "The people who lived in the "Byzantine Empire" never knew nor used the word "Byzantine." They know themselves to be Romans, nothing more and absolutely nothing less. By transferring the Imperial capital from Rome on the Tiber to the New Rome on Bosphorus, dubbed Constantinople, the Emperor Constantine I had transferred the actual identity of Rome to the new location. Long before Constantine I, the idea of "Rome" had become dissociated from the Eternal City on the Tiber. For a Roman meant a Roman citizen, whereever he lived."

How do I edit the true date of the fall of the Roman Empire?

What, If Anything, Is A Byzantine?

David Koresh · 05-16-2008, 01:53 PM

Forget Wiki, its far too tainted by liberal bias. Its all about Main Page - Conservapedia

**Lubaolong** · 05-16-2008, 02:14 PM

Wikipedia is quite good, but no, you shouldn't cite it for research. Encyclopedias are not considered academic or professional sources.

Titus001 · 05-16-2008, 02:46 PM

Those pricks are still defending 476AD. They will get the hammer!

Talk:Roman Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

mnp2597 · 05-16-2008, 02:58 PM

Wikipedia is not a reliable source.I have posted on wiki and I am in no way reliable

Titus001 · 03:15 PM

SUCCESS!!! Someone changed the correct date from 476AD to 1453AD! They listened to me. I'm a roman god.... lol

Roman Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Talk:Roman Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

See my comments here

Whoever is changing the fall of the Roman empire to 1453 AD please keep it up. No need for the outdated date of 476AD when the eastern side survived for another 1000 years and continued to call themselves ROMAN! Byzantines= Romans. "The people who lived in the "Byzantine Empire" never knew nor used the word "Byzantine." They know themselves to be Romans, nothing more and absolutely nothing less. By transferring the Imperial capital from Rome on the Tiber to the New Rome on Bosphorus, dubbed Constantinople, the Emperor Constantine I had transferred the actual identity of Rome to the new location. Long before Constantine I, the idea of "Rome" had become dissociated from the Eternal City on the Tiber. For a Roman meant a Roman citizen, whereever he lived.

Funny that some people here still believe in the myth that the roman empire only lasted 400 years or fell in 476AD. The Eastern Roman empire lasted another 1,000 years but they are not roman when they the people called themselves roman? They continued the roman past and HAD the same borders but we modern people have to invent a new word to describe an empire that they never knew nor used the words byzantine. They called themselves roman and so shall we for the correct history of this empire from 27bc-- 1453AD. I urge the people to change the date from 476AD to the correct date of 1453AD. Enough of the propaganda that the empire fell in 476AD when the eastern roman empire survived for another 1,000 years. I suggest you read the link I gave about the "Byzantines". It is also a joke that the "Holy Roman empire" is even mentioned in this wiki page. They should be removed.

What, If Anything, Is A Byzantine?