![]() | Ai-Khanoum is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 2, 2023. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
![]() | A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
November 16, 2022. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that artefacts from
Ai-Khanoum, a
Hellenistic city rediscovered by
the King of Afghanistan in 1961, include a "remarkable" disc (pictured) displaying "hybrid Greek and Oriental imagery"? | |||||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has had its dating nomenclature changed on 09:57, 3 February 2007. The original article system employed is BC/AD and it is Wikipedia policy that this not be changed. The change from 09:57, 3 February 2007 is then in violation. Changing it back is the only fair way to apply policy on an issue that divides so many. Unfortunately we have some people who refuse to comply with this policy and will support changes in the dating nomenclature based on personal preference. Avraham is such an editor, though this person has been shown the facts that this article had the BC/AD system employed he still supports the change made on 09:57, 3 February 2007. This is in violation of Wikipedia policy and is also rather disrespectful to those who do not agree with him but abide by policy. Avraham also refers to WP:MOSDATE ( http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:MOSDATE&redirect=no) which completely supports my statement when you look at the full edit history of this article. Please review the edit history to reveal the truth, you will find that the first application of any dating was the BC/AD on 13:06, 23 July 2004 by PHG. Lets be honest and not biased. Thank you… Monsieur Voltaire ( talk) 05:55, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Lotus designs predate alexander so it has nothing to do with greek influence as exhibited on indian punch marked coins which predate alexander's invasion.
Link: https://classicalnumismaticgallery.com/searchauctionitem.aspx?auctioncode=11&pricerange=&keyword=&category=1&material=0&lotno= Link: http://www.rajgors.com/auctioncataloguesold.aspx?auid=53
im sure similar is the case with palmette
both lotus and palmette designs were copied from ancient egypt, since there are no lotuses, palm trees in greece, lotus, palms are both native to north india.
@ पाटलिपुत्र:, I am trying to improve and expand this article. While it may be long-standing, the image overkill, lack of citations, and general focus on superficial detail are not aspects which lend themselves to good articles. I intend to get this article up to GA and perhaps even FA; if you wish, I will do my edits in a sandbox, and then copy them here. Best wishes. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 12:25, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
@ AirshipJungleman29: I have added a Fair Use image of a 3-D reconstruction of Ai-Khanoum for the infobox. It can be used somewhere else in the article if necessary, but will ultimately be deleted if not used. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 10:36, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
@ पाटलिपुत्र:, please stop justifying the inclusion of content violating Wikipedia's policies by stating it is 'long-standing'. Not only is this justification completely irrelevant to whether the content should remain on Wikipedia, it also reflects poorly on yourself for trying to keep it on the article. A simple quick skim of the Boardman article would tell you that Ai-Khaoum was only mentioned as an example of Persian architecture in Hellenistic construction programs. I will remove the paragraph, and I expect any reversion of that change to be preceded by an evidence-based argument on this talk page. Thank you. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 19:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
I have provided two sources with 'nacre' above, and I find myself reluctant to overturn them based on 'just looking at the photograph'. Best wishes.~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 20:33, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
SL93 (
talk)
19:55, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by AirshipJungleman29 ( talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke ( talk) at 03:15, 18 October 2022 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook eligibility:
Image eligibility:
QPQ: Done. |
Overall:
Earwig's
picks up some similarity, but I checked and it's only (long) titles of sources, so no issue (we can't "rephrase" the title of a source). As for the hooks, I prefer ALT2 or ALT3; ALT0 and ALT1 are only about external circumstances, which are unusual, but don't highlight why this city was (is) so important. I know it's your choice, and there's no guarantee, but I still say this at a number of nominations: Why no picture? :) The GA reviewer specifically noted they were
"Impressed by the number of images and maps that are included, which really benefit the article."
I believe there might be a better angle for a hook about the site itself, ideally in combination with one of the several excellent pictures. How about e.g. the attached file, which is described as "a remarkable example of hybrid Greek and Oriental imagery that typified the arts of Hellenized Asia"
in its file description? Heck, the average Wikipedia reader might not even know about
Bactria or that Greeks were once in Afghanistan! There might be a hook angle about how the King of Afghanistan discovered an old Greek city there – ideally also with a mention of the art found and attached or other picture. Wanna give it try
Onegreatjoke &
AirshipJungleman29? –
LordPeterII (
talk)
15:58, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook eligibility:
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px. |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
83d40m, thank you for your changes to the article. You picked up on several typos that I missed when hastily reverting your initial revision. Nevertheless, I wish to point out a few things.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 00:04, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
Le décor du médaillon représente la déesse Cybèle traversant un pays montagneux dans son attelage de lions conduit par une Niké.lit. "The medallion's decoration represents the goddess Cybele crossing a mountainous country in her team of lions led by a Niké." You may wish to contrast the difference between 'the goddess Cybele' and 'a Niké'. I have deleted the link to the Roman goddess, but I will continue to revert the addition of a link to the Greek goddess.
This disk depicts two Greek goddesses, Cybele and Nike, in a chariot drawn by lions. They are attended to by a religious official holding a parasol over them as they approach an alter elevated by three steps with another religious official on its top level. Multiple astronomical symbols of religious importance are featured in the sky as well. These natural astronomical features held differing importance to the two cultures, but would have resonated nonetheless, as significant to both.I do not see how this clarifies "the Oriental features" of the medallion, especially the last two sentences, which are mostly just waffle, and would never pass at FAC.
Le contexte grec de la scène est accentué par la présence d'une Niké-aurige au côté de Cybèle. Rien de plus grec également que le vêtement des deux déesses et leur chevelure coiffée en rouleau autour de la tête.p.343 lit. "The Greek context of the scene is accentuated by the presence of a Nike-charioteer alongside Cybele. There is also nothing more Greek than the clothing of the two goddesses and their hair rolled up around the head." This confirms that here "Une Niké" is not meant to describe a "general spirit of victory" (which I am not even sure is a valid categorization), but one of the forms of the goddess Nike, here the "charriot-driving Niké", otherwise well known. It seems to me that the proposed description of two goddesses on the chariot, and the link to Nike (mythology), are thus probably correct. पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 15:56, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
overlooking of unsupportive details such as "at the moment" or "remarkable" does tend to provide different interpretations that may be used for justification, and how this relates to collaborative editing, which I am always in favour of, or "exploration beyond the superficial, with a quite personal objective". I believe you mean that my removal some words means I want to edit war because I feel I own the article, but I have not removed either "at the moment" or "remarkable" from the article. Could you please explain?
![]() | Ai-Khanoum is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 2, 2023. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
![]() | A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
November 16, 2022. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that artefacts from
Ai-Khanoum, a
Hellenistic city rediscovered by
the King of Afghanistan in 1961, include a "remarkable" disc (pictured) displaying "hybrid Greek and Oriental imagery"? | |||||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has had its dating nomenclature changed on 09:57, 3 February 2007. The original article system employed is BC/AD and it is Wikipedia policy that this not be changed. The change from 09:57, 3 February 2007 is then in violation. Changing it back is the only fair way to apply policy on an issue that divides so many. Unfortunately we have some people who refuse to comply with this policy and will support changes in the dating nomenclature based on personal preference. Avraham is such an editor, though this person has been shown the facts that this article had the BC/AD system employed he still supports the change made on 09:57, 3 February 2007. This is in violation of Wikipedia policy and is also rather disrespectful to those who do not agree with him but abide by policy. Avraham also refers to WP:MOSDATE ( http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:MOSDATE&redirect=no) which completely supports my statement when you look at the full edit history of this article. Please review the edit history to reveal the truth, you will find that the first application of any dating was the BC/AD on 13:06, 23 July 2004 by PHG. Lets be honest and not biased. Thank you… Monsieur Voltaire ( talk) 05:55, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Lotus designs predate alexander so it has nothing to do with greek influence as exhibited on indian punch marked coins which predate alexander's invasion.
Link: https://classicalnumismaticgallery.com/searchauctionitem.aspx?auctioncode=11&pricerange=&keyword=&category=1&material=0&lotno= Link: http://www.rajgors.com/auctioncataloguesold.aspx?auid=53
im sure similar is the case with palmette
both lotus and palmette designs were copied from ancient egypt, since there are no lotuses, palm trees in greece, lotus, palms are both native to north india.
@ पाटलिपुत्र:, I am trying to improve and expand this article. While it may be long-standing, the image overkill, lack of citations, and general focus on superficial detail are not aspects which lend themselves to good articles. I intend to get this article up to GA and perhaps even FA; if you wish, I will do my edits in a sandbox, and then copy them here. Best wishes. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 12:25, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
@ AirshipJungleman29: I have added a Fair Use image of a 3-D reconstruction of Ai-Khanoum for the infobox. It can be used somewhere else in the article if necessary, but will ultimately be deleted if not used. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 10:36, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
@ पाटलिपुत्र:, please stop justifying the inclusion of content violating Wikipedia's policies by stating it is 'long-standing'. Not only is this justification completely irrelevant to whether the content should remain on Wikipedia, it also reflects poorly on yourself for trying to keep it on the article. A simple quick skim of the Boardman article would tell you that Ai-Khaoum was only mentioned as an example of Persian architecture in Hellenistic construction programs. I will remove the paragraph, and I expect any reversion of that change to be preceded by an evidence-based argument on this talk page. Thank you. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 19:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
I have provided two sources with 'nacre' above, and I find myself reluctant to overturn them based on 'just looking at the photograph'. Best wishes.~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 20:33, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
SL93 (
talk)
19:55, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by AirshipJungleman29 ( talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke ( talk) at 03:15, 18 October 2022 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook eligibility:
Image eligibility:
QPQ: Done. |
Overall:
Earwig's
picks up some similarity, but I checked and it's only (long) titles of sources, so no issue (we can't "rephrase" the title of a source). As for the hooks, I prefer ALT2 or ALT3; ALT0 and ALT1 are only about external circumstances, which are unusual, but don't highlight why this city was (is) so important. I know it's your choice, and there's no guarantee, but I still say this at a number of nominations: Why no picture? :) The GA reviewer specifically noted they were
"Impressed by the number of images and maps that are included, which really benefit the article."
I believe there might be a better angle for a hook about the site itself, ideally in combination with one of the several excellent pictures. How about e.g. the attached file, which is described as "a remarkable example of hybrid Greek and Oriental imagery that typified the arts of Hellenized Asia"
in its file description? Heck, the average Wikipedia reader might not even know about
Bactria or that Greeks were once in Afghanistan! There might be a hook angle about how the King of Afghanistan discovered an old Greek city there – ideally also with a mention of the art found and attached or other picture. Wanna give it try
Onegreatjoke &
AirshipJungleman29? –
LordPeterII (
talk)
15:58, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook eligibility:
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px. |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
83d40m, thank you for your changes to the article. You picked up on several typos that I missed when hastily reverting your initial revision. Nevertheless, I wish to point out a few things.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 00:04, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
Le décor du médaillon représente la déesse Cybèle traversant un pays montagneux dans son attelage de lions conduit par une Niké.lit. "The medallion's decoration represents the goddess Cybele crossing a mountainous country in her team of lions led by a Niké." You may wish to contrast the difference between 'the goddess Cybele' and 'a Niké'. I have deleted the link to the Roman goddess, but I will continue to revert the addition of a link to the Greek goddess.
This disk depicts two Greek goddesses, Cybele and Nike, in a chariot drawn by lions. They are attended to by a religious official holding a parasol over them as they approach an alter elevated by three steps with another religious official on its top level. Multiple astronomical symbols of religious importance are featured in the sky as well. These natural astronomical features held differing importance to the two cultures, but would have resonated nonetheless, as significant to both.I do not see how this clarifies "the Oriental features" of the medallion, especially the last two sentences, which are mostly just waffle, and would never pass at FAC.
Le contexte grec de la scène est accentué par la présence d'une Niké-aurige au côté de Cybèle. Rien de plus grec également que le vêtement des deux déesses et leur chevelure coiffée en rouleau autour de la tête.p.343 lit. "The Greek context of the scene is accentuated by the presence of a Nike-charioteer alongside Cybele. There is also nothing more Greek than the clothing of the two goddesses and their hair rolled up around the head." This confirms that here "Une Niké" is not meant to describe a "general spirit of victory" (which I am not even sure is a valid categorization), but one of the forms of the goddess Nike, here the "charriot-driving Niké", otherwise well known. It seems to me that the proposed description of two goddesses on the chariot, and the link to Nike (mythology), are thus probably correct. पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 15:56, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
overlooking of unsupportive details such as "at the moment" or "remarkable" does tend to provide different interpretations that may be used for justification, and how this relates to collaborative editing, which I am always in favour of, or "exploration beyond the superficial, with a quite personal objective". I believe you mean that my removal some words means I want to edit war because I feel I own the article, but I have not removed either "at the moment" or "remarkable" from the article. Could you please explain?