Talk:Byzantium

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Byzantium article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

WikiProject Echo has identified Byzantium as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Latvian language Wikipedia.

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked

---

Contents 1 old talk 2 Wikipedia and Byzantium 3 Muslim should be capitalized. 4 emperors of the past and the present 5 The Flag of Byzantium 6 Name trivia 7 Merging

[edit] old talk

Well, actually maybe it did take an oracle. Byzantium was an ooooold colony, and had never been of any particular importance. It took bureaucracy to populate it and imperial commands to make aristocrats live there! --MichaelTinkler

[edit] Wikipedia and Byzantium

This is a perfectly reasonable 200 word entry and maybe all I should expect from Wikipedia. But Jeez -- the Empire lasted 1100 years! Is it unreasonable to expect a little more depth from this medium??

Er...did you look at the article on the Byzantine Empire? This article is just about the city of Istanbul during the period when it was called Byzantium. At any rate, yes, it is unreasonable to expect that any given Wikipedia article will be particularly good. Those of us who work on wikipedia are working hard to improve it, but it takes a lot of work, and none of us are paid to do this. So while there are some articles that are great, there are others that are quite mediocre. If you think you can make this article better, of course, you should feel free to contribute - we'd love to have the help. john k 16:35, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks so much John K. Your work and other researchers is truly appreciated. I use Wikipedia everyday to help me get through school, especially my Civilizations class. I had no idea until I read this excerpt you typed that you do not get paid for this. I truly appreciate you, you have been a world of help to me. Thank you so much, Girl in Jersey...Monique 3:51, Nov. 30, 2005

[edit] Muslim should be capitalized.

the word Muslim should be capitalized. -- 70.120.221.138 (Talk |Contributions) (previous user forgot to sign so I signed for him. -- SusanLarson ^{(User Talk, New talk, Contribs)} 03:10, 12 December 2005 (UTC))

[edit] emperors of the past and the present

Don't you think this should be merged with Constantinople?

• Not really, becasue Byzantine was a notable Greek city well before becoming part of the Roman Empire, and later capitol of it. The two are best left seperate, with some info in both. 12.220.94.199 19:42, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Flag of Byzantium

There seems to be an inconsistency with this one- here the flag is sia dto have incorpoated the star in 330 AD (or thereabouts) and then was adopted by the Ottoman Empire. In the article on the Flag of the Ottoman Empire the star wasn't introduced until the 1844. Anyone who knows which is right should probably address this!{unsigned}

I think worse that this is the very story. It is my understanding that the crescent was a Muslim symbol long before the Turks conquered Constantinople. In fact, I have often heard a story wherein upon the conqering of Constantinople the cross atop the Hagia Sophia was replaced with a crescent (as can still be seen) as part of its conversion from a church to a mosque. Unless I see opposition, I am going to edit the section. Israelite9191 08:08, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Hey, "attributate" isn't a word! -gh

[edit] Name trivia

The following was added to Constantinople by an anon user - I moved it here as it seemed like trivia in that article and is more appropriate in this article. I moved it to this talk page as I'm not sure it is accurate, someone else may want to incorporate it into the article who knows more about it. -- Stbalbach 16:34, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

There are also two traditions on the name Byzantium. The first one speaks of the city built between two "byzia" (literally meaning boobs) i.e. "wealty regions" Europe and Asia and it was called Byzantium because it was in the middle of two continents. The second one speaks of a Delphi omen saying to Vyzas "built your city close to the city of the blind". Vyzas searched for the "city of the blind", but there was no such city. When he saw the place where Byzantium was to be built he liked so much, that when he saw a city built in Asia accross the Byzantium location (Scoutari or Chrysoupoli) he said to the colonists that they should built their city there cause the "city of the blind" was in Asia already built by "blind" people unable to see the beauty of Byzantium's location.

[edit] Merging

The reason is actually obvious, if you check the Istanbul article, there are sections about Constantinople and Byzantium. The Constantinople and Byzantium articles would fit there quite well. Furthermore, these articles contains material common to Byzantine Empire (even Roman Empire). By merging the articles we would have a chance to avoid to represent the same staff in different places. E104421 17:00, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Since the character of the city has changed so dramatically over time, I think it would be better to keep individual pages for Byzantium, Constantinople, and Istanbul. Tom Harrison ^Talk 20:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

These articles should not be merged. For one, the article would be too long and would need to be split again on size grounds. For another, when a reader searches on "Byzantium" or "Constantinople" they don't expect to read about Istanbul the modern city - these are distinct phases (Pagan, Christian, Muslim) with distinct histories and context. Lastly, E104421's concern about duplication is actually a feature of Wikipedia. We have Main article tags that direct readers to the main article, with a short summary paragraph. This is commonly done throughout Wikipedia and works well - in best practice the short summary paragraph would be a cut-paste of the main articles Wikipedia:Lead section. This is discussed in the Manual of Style. -- Stbalbach 13:18, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, then, i'm removing the tag. E104421 10:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

You only want to merge the articles for your personal reasons; let's say fewer articles indicating the Greek history of Istanbul going back to antiquity. Even if such a ridiculous POV-push did take place, it wouldn't last. The article Constantinople has had enough POV-pushing by Turkish editors already, such as the official usage of the term Constantinople only until 1453 (instead, say, 1930). So let's just leave it at that. Miskin 15:04, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Hey, i already explained my reasons above, do not mix/compare other's edits with mine. I'm only responsible with my own edits. Be civil at first. E104421 15:35, 29 October 2006 (UTC)