Talk:List of Roman civil wars and revolts

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

List

This article has been rated as List-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Classical warfare task force (c. 700 BC – c. 500 AD)

Classical Greece and Rome High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sulla

Excuse me...but I was under the impression Sulla's march on Rome was a success (initial in 88BC). AFTER he left Rome Marius returned and conducted his slaughter. But if you classify Sulla's second march on Rome as separate it strikes me that you should classify Marius' march as distinct from Sulla's first march.

Also, I think the names of the Republican wars are unencyclopedic - such as 'Final War of the Roman Republic'.

I would agree with you, I've changed the 1st Sullan Civil War to a Sullan victory. However, it might be worth adding that Marius temporarily took Rome leading up to the 2nd Sullan war? - Norminator (talk) 11:38, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

why is this article on the republican civil wars only???

Why aren't any of the civil wars of the empire written about here? - PocklingtonDan 19:47, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because the article is incomplete. Most of Wikipedia's articles are incompleete, save - possibly - some of the article which have been edited to "featured" caliber. Feel free to expand when you find a lack. - Vedexent (talk) - 19:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lepidus and Sertorius

Shouldn't we add the Sertorian revolt in Spain as a civil war as well and also add the revolt of Lepidus and Brutus in 77 BC? -- fdewaele, 12 July 2008, 12:53 (CET).

The article stats that ceasar fought against 'conservative republicans). This is incorrect and one can say POV. Ceasar fought against reactionarys that were in the senate. other civil wars that were listed stated senate forces against .....

should it not be ceasar against senatorial forces? After all sulla and his optimates beat the populares in his second civil war but it doesn't say Sulla versus Liberal republicans —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.117.17.200 (talk) 22:55, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

44 BC

The so-called Post-Caesarian civil war (44 BC) merely links to Battle of Mutina. Although treating the military history of individual battles is a good way to focus on the details of strategy, the history of the civil war in this year shouldn't be carved up into bits; that is, there's no reason to have a "post-Caesarian civil war" article that is separate from the Liberators' civil war (44–42 BC). I would suggest having a unified article on the war as a subject of history (political and social history), with separate articles on notable battles. Cynwolfe (talk) 20:52, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Servile Wars

Should the Servile Wars be included? I think they should be considered "civil wars" by an ordinary definition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by InformationvsInjustice (talk • contribs) 04:25, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]