This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Temple of Artemis article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 1 April 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was speedy keep. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 21, 2007, July 21, 2008, July 21, 2009, July 21, 2010, July 21, 2012, and July 21, 2015. |
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass/ixbin/hixclient.exe?_IXDB_=compass&_IXFIRST_=1&_IXMAXHITS_=1&_IXSPFX_=graphical/full/&$+with+all_unique_id_index+is+$=ENC111861&submit-button=summary is the link to the British Museum's objects from the Temple of Artemis, once I figure out how to make a pretty wiki link to a very long http address.
Damnit, just spent the morning creating another Temple of Artemis article, under the impression that it didn't exist. (Empty link from the Seven Wonders page) Curses.
I'm going to try and merge, but our formats are quite different, so I think I'll just add entire sections without touching your info. I might move a few sentences or incorporate them, I hope you don't mind.
-
Phaust
I removed the Ptolemy reference ("Ptolemy, 5"), or actually, commented it out, 'cause (a) it's not enough of a reference — which work of his? — and (b) I couldn't find any reference to the Artemision in those works of his I do have at hand: the Geography, the Optics, the Tetrabiblos. The closest, and I suspect the origin of the vague reference, was a bald listing of Ephesus with its coördinates in the Geography, V.2, but no mention there of the Artemision. I'm quite prepared to stand corrected of course if you guys find the elusive citation. — Bill 14:46, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I recently visited Selcuk/Ephesus, and saw this. I have one question: How would this marble building have burned down? Granted, it probably would have had many rugs/wooden furniture/decorations that could burn, but how would that destroy the actual building? Many other stone buildings have had large fire (The "Black Church" in Brasov, Romania comes to mind), but the stone part has survived the destruction.
Did the ancient building techniques include something like lead in the mortar which might have melted under a fire's heat? Can anyone offer a good link or explanation on how this would have reduced the building to rubble?
VANDALISM?? -- Is the introduction of "Tim Mundy" as the perpetrator a joke or act of vandalism?? If so, this should be corrected. I could not find in the page's history where this was done, but maybe someone can correct this. Also "Herostratic" was changed to "Mundatic." Is there a way to remove the perpetrator's account from Wikipedia? -- Splitrock105 ( talk) 19:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
OK. It was changed back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Splitrock105 ( talk • contribs) 19:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
whatever one thinks about the historicity of Acts of John, in the original text it is stated that John the Evangelist and NOT Paul of Tarsus was the one who prayed in the Temple of Artemis, which allegedly caused the "miraculous" destruction of the altar and some part of the building. Here's the source text; the link was taken from the wikipedia article on Acts of John http://www.gnosis.org/library/actjohn.htm Critto ( talk) 21:06, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
New edit: "...was built around 550 BC at Ephesus (present day Turkey) during the Achaemenid Persian period... How sensible is this? Or is this just Third World Acting Up?-- Wetman 07:31, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
We definitely have a problem somewhere. Because if the temple was started by King Croesus, around 550, it would indeed have been built mostly under Achaemenid satraps and completed around 430 BC. This is not impossible though, since the Persians did not suppress local cults. The other possibility is that it would have been started around 670 BC and completed under the reign of Croesus. Of course, that would be mostly before the Achaemenids became kings of Anšan. -- Svartalf 01:50, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Those aren't breasts. They're aurochs' (bulls') testicles. -- Fulminouscherub 22:08, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Interestingly, Mary, mother of Jesus, retired in Ephesus. Thus, even with the passing of the pagan era, Ephesus remains a center of virgin goddess worship. -- Fulminouscherub 22:21, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Would you mind quoting some sources please? In France we have some very interesting traditions about Mary Magdalene and the children Jesus begot on her, but I don't go mentioning those in here (well, in relevant articles)--
Svartalf 01:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC), because the sources aren't reputable... Actually, I guess that the legend is completely apocryphal, and sprang up because Ephesus was already the worship center for a Great Goddess, whom the Greeks had (in spite of all logic... why did they not make her into a Demeter, of even a Hera?) associated with a virgin deity of theirs. --
Svartalf
01:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
-- Fulminouscherub 00:27, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
this is useless
Although the Roman Diana and the Greek Artemis were perpetual virgins, Cybele, who originated in Anatolia and more closely resembled the goddess of the Ephesian temple, had the title of "Mother of Gods." It may not be coincidental that it was the Council of Ephesus which agreed to give Mary the title of "Mother of God." NRPanikker 03:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
I removed a throwaway comment about the chosen location 'emphasising Alexander the Great's vast empire', which is a bizarre statement given that the temple was completed 200 years before he was born and destroyed the same day he was born, years before he had an empire. Ignoring the fact that a temple in Ionia, which had been 'Greek territory' for hundreds of years, hardly impresses the expanse of the newly-won empire from Greece to India. Xander 10:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I moved this here, as it's troubled me from the start: "Like the other wonders, Antipater chose the temple for his list not only because of its beauty or size, but also because it rested near the border of the Greek world. This inspired a sense of mystery and awe for the Greeks." But no: since one of the Wonders was Olympia, this is patently untrue. In Hellenistic times, Ephesus was not peripheral in any sense. Nor were Rhodes or Alexandria. -- Wetman 14:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
One section says nothing remains of the temple and another says a single column is still there -- which is it? Largesock 18:34, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Can someone alter the 'ancient' writing on the page that says "all but nothing remains..." Obviously we all know what it means, but let's strive for some clear and simple writing here at Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.128.18 ( talk) 06:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
This is incorrect, Plutarch reported a remark; see http://www.ancientlibrary.com/smith-bio/1547.html 14:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Removing the phrase:
from the Ephesian Artemis section. Lofty anti-Christianity sentiment here, as well as an opinion, passed off as fact, that violates the "original research" clause and is patently untrue to boot. The early Christians (a monotheistic society) may not have been as accepting of other gods as their contemporary friends the Romans (a polytheistic society), but they were far from "unique" in their "approach to gods that were not theirs". Eastern world history much (or for that matter, Judaism)? 76.102.165.45 ( talk) 03:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Back on 16 May 2004 I introduced "eunuch priests called megabyzi". Now I think this should have been "eunuch priests, such as the Megabyzus known to Xenophon". Megabyzus (not the Persian general), "sacristan" (in this translation) of the Artemision at Ephesus, returned to Xenophon when he was in exile at Scillos, the gold that had been set aside for the Lady of Ephesus on the shore of the Black Sea, in gratitude for the safe arrival of most of the Ten Thousand ( Anabasis 5.3). Xenophon used the gold to buy a plot at Scillus, not far from Olympia, and set it aside for the Lady of Ephesus . Is this the only source of a connection of "Megabyzi" with Ephesus? Should I correct the text taking Megabyzus to be Xenonphon's friend, not a title? -- Wetman ( talk) 20:49, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Currently appearing in the introduction: "Around 550 BC, they started to build the "new" temple, known as one of the miracles of the ancient world." Is this encyclopedic? The rather questionable phrasing was contributed by user Protomoney on the 9th of August 2008 (see article history), and has not been subsequently challenged as far as I can tell. I am certainly aware of the (Seven) Wonders of the Ancient World in referencing certain archeological sites, but never miracles of the ancient world. True, in certain contexts (eg: the Bible), the words "wonders" and "miracles" are sometimes interchangeable, but I think that these refer to certain "supernatural" actions, not things that were constructed "naturally" without miraculous powers or something. Is it simply a problem with differences in language translations from a non-English user's Language X (perhaps Greek?) to English? Perhaps some cultures refer to the Seven Wonders as the Seven Miracles? If so, I think we need a link or reference or something to prove this point. Otherwise I think it ought to read "Wonders...". -- T-dot ( Talk/ contribs ) 18:25, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
I removed the phrase (and therefore the link). To link a Greek legal decision of 356 BC/BCE to a much later Roman, Latin legal (or quasi-legal) term offers the misleading impression that even back then, Greeks used Roman laws and Latin terms. Haploidavey ( talk) 01:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
"Falsified" ? Did LIDONNICI say that, or did the article writer feel like imputing their own bias? -IF LIDONNICI said it, then may it need the "[sic]" add?
"Lynn LIDONNICI observes that modern scholars are likely to be more concerned with origins of the Lady of Ephesus and her iconology than her adherents were at any point in time, and are also prone to creating a synthetic account of the Lady of Ephesus by drawing together documentation that ranges over more than a millennium in its origins, creating a FALSIFIED, unitary picture, as of an unchanging icon." 2010-03-06T16:10Z-8 76.90.226.194 ( talk) 00:10, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
"In 401, the temple in its last version was finally destroyed by a mob led by St. John Chrysostom,[25] and the stones were used in construction of other buildings."
The source given for this is hardly a definitive history. After checking it, it does not appear to cite its sources, either. I can find no mention in any of the primary documents that Chrysostom was involved in the temple's destruction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.159.128.74 ( talk) 15:19, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
On the "Nyx" page, under the subtitle "Role in Society", there is a line saying that Nyx had a statue at Artemis Temple, Ephesus. Yet there is no mention, picture, or external link of it here. So is it true, or have the two pages simply not caught up with each other yet? Coin flip as the line is unreferenced. 76.90.229.237 ( talk) 20:23, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm going to re-arrange the article, because some sections have expanded considerably and perhaps disproportionately over time, with unnecessary repetition within them. Let's stick mostly to the Temple itself, yes? As at least three are known (or maybe two, and one suspected: no, four, who'd have thunk it?), I think it would help to present them in chronological order, thus obviating the need for a separate (and repetitious) summary on Architecture and Art. Some of the section on cult might be moved to the main article; but I'll leave that for now, and go for the rest. Haploidavey ( talk) 14:14, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
St. John Chrystostom was never Archbishop of Ephesus. I have thus removed that part of the comment 76.121.94.212 ( talk) 05:18, 3 June 2011 (UTC) Reader Steven Clark, Orthodox Church in America, ancientraditionalfish@gmail.com
hwo was it that burnt down that beautiful temple? (Ireally didn't want to read all of that.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.97.139.245 ( talk) 13:42, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
How do you know it was 21 July? They didn't have our calendar. Exactly what does the source say? Soerfm ( talk) 17:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
I wonder how it's possible that a temple built wholly of marble can be set on fire and burned down? :) 85.81.40.95 ( talk) 19:43, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
The opening sentence of "Second phase" currently reads:
The new temple was sponsored at least in part by Croesus, who founded Lydia's empire and was overlord of Ephesus,[10] and was designed and constructed from around 5500 BC by the Cretan architect Chersiphron and his son Metagenes.
The year 5500 BC is clearly wrong, but its source isn't clear. I have edited 5500 BC to 550 BC to match the lead section of the article, but if another editor has a good source, please make further correction.
Oaklandguy (
talk)
00:45, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
71.223.60.153 ( talk) 22:12, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Temple of Artemis. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:53, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
This article was excluded from an On This Day mention because of Page Number Needed tags, all for Nielsen, M. (2009). I hope someone can fix those for 21 July 2023! Sparafucil ( talk) 20:50, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Please consider including the insights from this newly published article: Bilby, Mark. G. and Anna Lefteratou. "A Dramatic Heist of Epic Proportion: Iphigenia among the Taurians in the Acts of the Apostles," Harvard Theological Review 115.4 (2002) 496-518. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816022000293
Full disclosure of potential bias: As one of the co-authors, I'm suggesting that this article be consulted and considered by Wikipedia editors, not presuming to evaluate whether it merits citation in this entry. Vocesanticae ( talk) 16:00, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Temple of Artemis article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 1 April 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was speedy keep. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 21, 2007, July 21, 2008, July 21, 2009, July 21, 2010, July 21, 2012, and July 21, 2015. |
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass/ixbin/hixclient.exe?_IXDB_=compass&_IXFIRST_=1&_IXMAXHITS_=1&_IXSPFX_=graphical/full/&$+with+all_unique_id_index+is+$=ENC111861&submit-button=summary is the link to the British Museum's objects from the Temple of Artemis, once I figure out how to make a pretty wiki link to a very long http address.
Damnit, just spent the morning creating another Temple of Artemis article, under the impression that it didn't exist. (Empty link from the Seven Wonders page) Curses.
I'm going to try and merge, but our formats are quite different, so I think I'll just add entire sections without touching your info. I might move a few sentences or incorporate them, I hope you don't mind.
-
Phaust
I removed the Ptolemy reference ("Ptolemy, 5"), or actually, commented it out, 'cause (a) it's not enough of a reference — which work of his? — and (b) I couldn't find any reference to the Artemision in those works of his I do have at hand: the Geography, the Optics, the Tetrabiblos. The closest, and I suspect the origin of the vague reference, was a bald listing of Ephesus with its coördinates in the Geography, V.2, but no mention there of the Artemision. I'm quite prepared to stand corrected of course if you guys find the elusive citation. — Bill 14:46, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I recently visited Selcuk/Ephesus, and saw this. I have one question: How would this marble building have burned down? Granted, it probably would have had many rugs/wooden furniture/decorations that could burn, but how would that destroy the actual building? Many other stone buildings have had large fire (The "Black Church" in Brasov, Romania comes to mind), but the stone part has survived the destruction.
Did the ancient building techniques include something like lead in the mortar which might have melted under a fire's heat? Can anyone offer a good link or explanation on how this would have reduced the building to rubble?
VANDALISM?? -- Is the introduction of "Tim Mundy" as the perpetrator a joke or act of vandalism?? If so, this should be corrected. I could not find in the page's history where this was done, but maybe someone can correct this. Also "Herostratic" was changed to "Mundatic." Is there a way to remove the perpetrator's account from Wikipedia? -- Splitrock105 ( talk) 19:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
OK. It was changed back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Splitrock105 ( talk • contribs) 19:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
whatever one thinks about the historicity of Acts of John, in the original text it is stated that John the Evangelist and NOT Paul of Tarsus was the one who prayed in the Temple of Artemis, which allegedly caused the "miraculous" destruction of the altar and some part of the building. Here's the source text; the link was taken from the wikipedia article on Acts of John http://www.gnosis.org/library/actjohn.htm Critto ( talk) 21:06, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
New edit: "...was built around 550 BC at Ephesus (present day Turkey) during the Achaemenid Persian period... How sensible is this? Or is this just Third World Acting Up?-- Wetman 07:31, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
We definitely have a problem somewhere. Because if the temple was started by King Croesus, around 550, it would indeed have been built mostly under Achaemenid satraps and completed around 430 BC. This is not impossible though, since the Persians did not suppress local cults. The other possibility is that it would have been started around 670 BC and completed under the reign of Croesus. Of course, that would be mostly before the Achaemenids became kings of Anšan. -- Svartalf 01:50, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Those aren't breasts. They're aurochs' (bulls') testicles. -- Fulminouscherub 22:08, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Interestingly, Mary, mother of Jesus, retired in Ephesus. Thus, even with the passing of the pagan era, Ephesus remains a center of virgin goddess worship. -- Fulminouscherub 22:21, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Would you mind quoting some sources please? In France we have some very interesting traditions about Mary Magdalene and the children Jesus begot on her, but I don't go mentioning those in here (well, in relevant articles)--
Svartalf 01:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC), because the sources aren't reputable... Actually, I guess that the legend is completely apocryphal, and sprang up because Ephesus was already the worship center for a Great Goddess, whom the Greeks had (in spite of all logic... why did they not make her into a Demeter, of even a Hera?) associated with a virgin deity of theirs. --
Svartalf
01:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
-- Fulminouscherub 00:27, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
this is useless
Although the Roman Diana and the Greek Artemis were perpetual virgins, Cybele, who originated in Anatolia and more closely resembled the goddess of the Ephesian temple, had the title of "Mother of Gods." It may not be coincidental that it was the Council of Ephesus which agreed to give Mary the title of "Mother of God." NRPanikker 03:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
I removed a throwaway comment about the chosen location 'emphasising Alexander the Great's vast empire', which is a bizarre statement given that the temple was completed 200 years before he was born and destroyed the same day he was born, years before he had an empire. Ignoring the fact that a temple in Ionia, which had been 'Greek territory' for hundreds of years, hardly impresses the expanse of the newly-won empire from Greece to India. Xander 10:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I moved this here, as it's troubled me from the start: "Like the other wonders, Antipater chose the temple for his list not only because of its beauty or size, but also because it rested near the border of the Greek world. This inspired a sense of mystery and awe for the Greeks." But no: since one of the Wonders was Olympia, this is patently untrue. In Hellenistic times, Ephesus was not peripheral in any sense. Nor were Rhodes or Alexandria. -- Wetman 14:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
One section says nothing remains of the temple and another says a single column is still there -- which is it? Largesock 18:34, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Can someone alter the 'ancient' writing on the page that says "all but nothing remains..." Obviously we all know what it means, but let's strive for some clear and simple writing here at Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.128.18 ( talk) 06:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
This is incorrect, Plutarch reported a remark; see http://www.ancientlibrary.com/smith-bio/1547.html 14:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Removing the phrase:
from the Ephesian Artemis section. Lofty anti-Christianity sentiment here, as well as an opinion, passed off as fact, that violates the "original research" clause and is patently untrue to boot. The early Christians (a monotheistic society) may not have been as accepting of other gods as their contemporary friends the Romans (a polytheistic society), but they were far from "unique" in their "approach to gods that were not theirs". Eastern world history much (or for that matter, Judaism)? 76.102.165.45 ( talk) 03:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Back on 16 May 2004 I introduced "eunuch priests called megabyzi". Now I think this should have been "eunuch priests, such as the Megabyzus known to Xenophon". Megabyzus (not the Persian general), "sacristan" (in this translation) of the Artemision at Ephesus, returned to Xenophon when he was in exile at Scillos, the gold that had been set aside for the Lady of Ephesus on the shore of the Black Sea, in gratitude for the safe arrival of most of the Ten Thousand ( Anabasis 5.3). Xenophon used the gold to buy a plot at Scillus, not far from Olympia, and set it aside for the Lady of Ephesus . Is this the only source of a connection of "Megabyzi" with Ephesus? Should I correct the text taking Megabyzus to be Xenonphon's friend, not a title? -- Wetman ( talk) 20:49, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Currently appearing in the introduction: "Around 550 BC, they started to build the "new" temple, known as one of the miracles of the ancient world." Is this encyclopedic? The rather questionable phrasing was contributed by user Protomoney on the 9th of August 2008 (see article history), and has not been subsequently challenged as far as I can tell. I am certainly aware of the (Seven) Wonders of the Ancient World in referencing certain archeological sites, but never miracles of the ancient world. True, in certain contexts (eg: the Bible), the words "wonders" and "miracles" are sometimes interchangeable, but I think that these refer to certain "supernatural" actions, not things that were constructed "naturally" without miraculous powers or something. Is it simply a problem with differences in language translations from a non-English user's Language X (perhaps Greek?) to English? Perhaps some cultures refer to the Seven Wonders as the Seven Miracles? If so, I think we need a link or reference or something to prove this point. Otherwise I think it ought to read "Wonders...". -- T-dot ( Talk/ contribs ) 18:25, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
I removed the phrase (and therefore the link). To link a Greek legal decision of 356 BC/BCE to a much later Roman, Latin legal (or quasi-legal) term offers the misleading impression that even back then, Greeks used Roman laws and Latin terms. Haploidavey ( talk) 01:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
"Falsified" ? Did LIDONNICI say that, or did the article writer feel like imputing their own bias? -IF LIDONNICI said it, then may it need the "[sic]" add?
"Lynn LIDONNICI observes that modern scholars are likely to be more concerned with origins of the Lady of Ephesus and her iconology than her adherents were at any point in time, and are also prone to creating a synthetic account of the Lady of Ephesus by drawing together documentation that ranges over more than a millennium in its origins, creating a FALSIFIED, unitary picture, as of an unchanging icon." 2010-03-06T16:10Z-8 76.90.226.194 ( talk) 00:10, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
"In 401, the temple in its last version was finally destroyed by a mob led by St. John Chrysostom,[25] and the stones were used in construction of other buildings."
The source given for this is hardly a definitive history. After checking it, it does not appear to cite its sources, either. I can find no mention in any of the primary documents that Chrysostom was involved in the temple's destruction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.159.128.74 ( talk) 15:19, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
On the "Nyx" page, under the subtitle "Role in Society", there is a line saying that Nyx had a statue at Artemis Temple, Ephesus. Yet there is no mention, picture, or external link of it here. So is it true, or have the two pages simply not caught up with each other yet? Coin flip as the line is unreferenced. 76.90.229.237 ( talk) 20:23, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm going to re-arrange the article, because some sections have expanded considerably and perhaps disproportionately over time, with unnecessary repetition within them. Let's stick mostly to the Temple itself, yes? As at least three are known (or maybe two, and one suspected: no, four, who'd have thunk it?), I think it would help to present them in chronological order, thus obviating the need for a separate (and repetitious) summary on Architecture and Art. Some of the section on cult might be moved to the main article; but I'll leave that for now, and go for the rest. Haploidavey ( talk) 14:14, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
St. John Chrystostom was never Archbishop of Ephesus. I have thus removed that part of the comment 76.121.94.212 ( talk) 05:18, 3 June 2011 (UTC) Reader Steven Clark, Orthodox Church in America, ancientraditionalfish@gmail.com
hwo was it that burnt down that beautiful temple? (Ireally didn't want to read all of that.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.97.139.245 ( talk) 13:42, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
How do you know it was 21 July? They didn't have our calendar. Exactly what does the source say? Soerfm ( talk) 17:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
I wonder how it's possible that a temple built wholly of marble can be set on fire and burned down? :) 85.81.40.95 ( talk) 19:43, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
The opening sentence of "Second phase" currently reads:
The new temple was sponsored at least in part by Croesus, who founded Lydia's empire and was overlord of Ephesus,[10] and was designed and constructed from around 5500 BC by the Cretan architect Chersiphron and his son Metagenes.
The year 5500 BC is clearly wrong, but its source isn't clear. I have edited 5500 BC to 550 BC to match the lead section of the article, but if another editor has a good source, please make further correction.
Oaklandguy (
talk)
00:45, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
71.223.60.153 ( talk) 22:12, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Temple of Artemis. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:53, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
This article was excluded from an On This Day mention because of Page Number Needed tags, all for Nielsen, M. (2009). I hope someone can fix those for 21 July 2023! Sparafucil ( talk) 20:50, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Please consider including the insights from this newly published article: Bilby, Mark. G. and Anna Lefteratou. "A Dramatic Heist of Epic Proportion: Iphigenia among the Taurians in the Acts of the Apostles," Harvard Theological Review 115.4 (2002) 496-518. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816022000293
Full disclosure of potential bias: As one of the co-authors, I'm suggesting that this article be consulted and considered by Wikipedia editors, not presuming to evaluate whether it merits citation in this entry. Vocesanticae ( talk) 16:00, 17 November 2022 (UTC)