Talk:Frigidarium

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Frigidarium. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051130103141/http://www.iol.ie:80/~coolmine/typ/romans/romans3.html to http://www.iol.ie/~coolmine/typ/romans/romans3.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:37, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pores don't "open" or "close"

It's a myth.

https://www.birchbox.com/magazine/article/skin-pores-myths-and-facts

RMcPhillip (talk) 18:43, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

History: initial text much better

Editor 'Raebrick' (inactive by now) introduced the entire paragraph here. Editor 'Truth Alone' (inactive by now) removed much of it, leaving a meaningless stump behind; his reason: "unsourced". However, the entire paragraph by Raebrick, both what Truth Alone erased and what he left standing, seems to be based on the source set at the end of the multi-sentence paragraph. The source is not accessible online, so I have to presume it contains the complete information. Does anyone have the book? Brill's New Pauly (2002), Vol. 2: ARK-CAS, page 254. Arminden (talk) 18:34, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Dubious" or "unsourced" tags

Poorly sourced at best:

• "circular plan"
  

Link leads to photo showing arbitrary section of a probably round pool, with the only explanation being "Pompeii: Baths of the Forum". Is it really a frigidarium? Plus: not a RS. Btw, the photo from Bath is as "good" (shows a round structure), i.e. neither is a RS.

Completely unsourced:

• "with its small pool of cold water or sometimes with a large swimming pool (though this, differently from the piscina natatoria, was usually covered)."
• "The water could be also kept cold by using snow."
• "The frigidarium was usually located on the northern side of the baths."
• "The largest examples of frigidarium were both in Rome: that of the Baths of Caracalla, located soon after the entrance, measures 58 x 24 m, and that of the Baths of Diocletian, covered by a groin vault."

I've done my bit, giving up now. Anyone else? Arminden (talk) 16:39, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]