Talk:Mixed bathing

Nudity Low‑importance

	Nudity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nudity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of nudity and naturism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NudityWikipedia:WikiProject NudityTemplate:WikiProject Nuditynudity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Swimming Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Swimming, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Swimming on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwimmingWikipedia:WikiProject SwimmingTemplate:WikiProject Swimmingswimming articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Question

I'm not sure I understand the practice of having the notes repeat almost exactly what's in the body text. (I've seen this in a few other articles.) In this case, the notes are longer than the article itself, and the citations seem adequate if someone wanted to verify whether the source actually said this. Cynwolfe (talk) 18:50, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Roman bathing

The situation at the Roman baths (see

Women in Ancient Rome#Social activities) was a little more complicated than is stated here. See Garrett G. Fagan, Bathing in Public in the Roman World (University of Michigan Press, 1999, 2002), p. 24ff. (here, if it's visible to anyone who'd want to expand the article). Cynwolfe (talk) 19:00, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Mixed-gender bath?

Wouldn't mixed-gender be more clear as a terminology? Some older generations might think "Mixed" to mean "mixed-race." --Makkachin (talk) 13:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mixed bathing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120617075417/http://www.oldmancunians.org/html/news/current/TOM%2021December%202005.pdf to http://www.oldmancunians.org/html/news/current/TOM%2021December%202005.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

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: 18 January 2022).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:45, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]