nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
13,818
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 8:
Line 8: + +
Rome was always weak?
:Ditto dude. Damn law school. My first love is & will always be Roman history. Don't tell my girlfriend.-'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 00:12, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
:Ditto dude. Damn law school. My first love is & will always be Roman history. Don't tell my girlfriend.-'''<font color="#007FFF">Ames</font><font color="#FF0000">G</font>'''<sub>[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!]</sub> 00:12, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
Do we really need weird stuff like some historian says the empire was never strong? The Parthian Empire rested on their eastern border for centuries. Famous Empires of Greece, Egypt, and Carthage no longer existed because Rome conquered them. This statement of weakness seems like POV that should be removed. We're not Wikipedia. We don't have to include views of "historians" who take controversial positions to gain notoriety for themselves. Just my thoughts. What do other editors think? [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 17:34, 7 May 2007 (EDT)