Talk:Peloponnesian War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Peloponnesian War article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Article policies
Former featured article Peloponnesian War is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article Milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Article Creation and Improvement Drive Peloponnesian War was the Article Creation and Improvement Drive for the week spanning from Wednesday, 17 January 2007.

For more details, see the Article Creation and Improvement Drive history.
To-do list: edit  · history  · watch  · refresh


Here are some tasks you can do:
    Other languages WikiProject Echo has identified Peloponnesian War as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the German,  Latin or Finnish language Wikipedias.
    Peer review This page has been selected for the release version of Wikipedia and rated B-Class on the assessment scale. It is in the category History.

    Contents

    [edit] Needing Help with Corinthian History

    I am studying the bible and currently the 2 books of 1st and 2nd Corinthians. It is my understanding that the Corinthins were sent into slavery working mines. I would like to know where I can view references to this bit of information as it will hlp me to understand the background of the Corinthian people. When did they go into slavery, why and for how long? are my basic questions but their history as well is very omportant to me. Thank you for your help. Mark Bjorndal

    That was probably after the Romans sacked Corinth in 146 BC...that was long after the Peloponnesian War. Adam Bishop 04:41, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)

    The maps of the Allies seems less than complete (the cities on Crete and the Sicilian cities being unlabeled).

    Ok, which Cretan cities were involved in the war? I can change the map but I need names and locations for the cities, and on which side they fought? Sicily would need a map of its own, but I am not likely to do one. -- Jniemenmaa 13:29, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

    The most important Cretan city is Knossos (alt. Cnossos) which was neutral during parts of the war and an Athenian ally during other parts. You can find it on this map http://www.utexas.edu/courses/clubmed/10061pelwarmap.jpg Also Corcya (Corkya) was a city as well as an island as was an ally (although highly unrelible) of the Athenians and until the Spartans killed the defenders Platia they were stauch allies of the Athenians. If you want you could try to find a copy of Steven Lattimore's translation, it has one of the more detailed maps I've encountered.QwertyMIDX 22:22, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

    This is my workcited list from my senior reseach paper all the information that i added was from that work that i posted on your web parge on the peloponnesin war.

    • ?Athens Invades Sicily. June, 415B.C.September 413B.C..?Discovering world History.2003.Gale Group. Newark High School Library, Newark, DE. 17 Nov. 2004.

    <http://galenet.galegroup.com/serletSRC>.

    • ?Classical Greek Civilization, 2000 B.C.-300B.C.?Discovering World History. 2003.

    Gale Group. Newark High School Library, Newark, DE. 17 Nov. 2004. <http://galenet.galegroup.com/serlet/SRC>.

    • ?Thucydides writes the History of the Peloponnesians War, 433 B.C. 403 B.C.? Discovering World History.2003. Gale Group. Newark High School Library, Newark, DE. 17 Nov. 2004.

    <http://galenet.galegroup.com/serletSRC>.

    • Cartledge, Paul.,ed. Ancient Greece. New York: Cambridge University Press,1998.
    • Chin, Beverly, et al.,eds. Glenco World Literature. New York: Glenco Mcgraw Hill Companies Inc.,2000.
    Thanks. I've edited your contribution a bit to make it fit into the article better. By the way, you can sign your posts by using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. That makes it easier to follow the discussion on the talk page. Adam Bishop 00:21, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)


    [edit] Discrepancy Between Articles

    The section titled "Peloponnesian War" in Ancient Greece has a boilerplate stating that the facts are in dispute. How is this even possible if Peloponnesian War is a featured article? Apparently, the people over at Ancient Greece don't know how to handle the situation; could someone who edits over here and knows the subject well go in and fix it for them? Eric Herboso 03:17, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

    [edit] Template needed

    This needs to use the Template:Battlebox, like seen on Polish-Soviet War for example. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 12:17, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

    [edit] Effects

    Should the section named effects be named effects? Most of the components in the section are not the effects of the war, but rather what occured after the war. I can't seem to think of a better title, though. (signed long afterwords because I forgot to sign it before,) AndyZ 00:18, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

    I accidentally, in the history of the article, typed in "Effects dpesm". I meant to type in Effects doesn't make sense because the section doesn't explain the effects of the war, but rather what happens after the war (or at least doesn't explain why they are effects). My right hand slipped and moved one key to the right on my keyboard each time, which is why I pressed enter prematurely and I ended up with "dpesm". AndyZ 21:09, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Usefulness of Aristophanes mention?

    Is Aristophanes really important enough to merit a mention in the opening paragraph? I can understand mentions of him later, but in the opening paragraph? Seems a little odd. But I'll leave it to someone who frequents this page.

    Hmm, it does seem a little out of place, like the WW2 article mentioning John Wayne movies in the lead. The usual thing would be to have a "The war in culture" section at the end or some such. One could argue that Aristophanes is the most notable route for general awareness of the war in the present age (Lysistrata revivals for instance); a second paragraph in the lead would make sense, since the article is longish. Stan 14:17, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Kudos

    Just a quick thanks--this article is very nicely written from a narrative point of view. I noticed that it wasn't chosen for a featured article and read why, but I do want to give props for the clarity and flow of the writing style. TheSPY 18:11, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] Empire or Hegemony?

    I think "Athenian hegemony" is a better, more epoch-consistent term for Athens' sphere of influence, instead of "Athenian Empire". The term is actually an anachronism, not used in historiography before the roman ideal of the "Imperium" came into existence. Potmos 17:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] League of Attica??

    I always thought that it was the Delian Laegue that was at war against the Spartans. Also I can not find anything about the Laegue of Attica??? so i was wounding wether they are the same thing just different names of them or if they are different thanks

    It would appear that someone came by and "sanitized" our language about the Athenian empire a couple of days ago; I have reverted. Who knew there were classical Athenian POV pushers? --Robth[[User

    Talk:Robth|Talk]] 23:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

    the Peloponnese was with Sparta i got mixed up sorry

    [edit] AID

    I've nominated this for the Article Improvement Drive, to hopefully bring up the quality of this article. If everyone interested could support the nomination, we might be able to give it the attention it needs. --YankeeDoodle14 00:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

    the delian league was allied with Sparta and the peloponnese with athens----

    [edit] Eclipse

    Why isn't the famous triple eclipse mentioned in this article? It only makes mention of a single eclipse. It would as be werth mentioning the fact that a triple/double eclipse allows for the date of the war to be mathematically determined, and all such efforts have strongly contradicted the conventional dating for unknown reasons.

    [edit] Alcibiades

    i am learning about the Peloponesian war and Athens, i had to do an essay on the war and... i never knew how Alcibiades had played a big part in the battle with the swapping sides DURING battle! thats crazy!!! but for my help through school, i need more information on the war, i can use links, summarys, and historic documents on the subject PLEASE! it can help out mutch,--64.251.55.229 12:53, 18 December 2006 (UTC)mike k

    [edit] GA hold

    The article is good and I'd be happy to promote it if a few changes are made. He they are:

    1. There are no inline citatation after the Break down of Peace section. Please add inline citations for those sections.
    2. The aftermath section is thin, if it is paossible please add some more info for that section.
    3. Could you also add a map showing the Delian League or Peloponnesian League if it is possible.

    THose are all my worries at the moment and if you are able to fix them I woould be more than happy to pass the article. Kyriakos 02:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

    Sorry, but I have to fail this article as none of my concerns were adressed. Better luck nesxt time. Kyriakos 21:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] GA status is under review

    I am contesting the failure of this article as a GA at the page above largely because the requests of the reviewer were indeed met. Diez2 16:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Result of the GAR

    [edit] Peloponnesian War

    result:Remain as Failed GA 4-0

    I usually don't disagree with GA failures, but this is one I must contest. The article was placed on hold for about 4-5 days because the reviewer stated that it needed more in-line citations. User:YankeeDoodle14 carried out almost all of his instructions the day after it was placed on hold. About 3 days later, the reviewer comes back and fails the article because "none of his instructions had been carried out." I'm sorry, but I do think that this article deserves GA status. Diez2 16:52, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

    • Oppose GA My review, it generally started out well but the following sections contain no references; The "Archidamian War", Peace of Nicias, Sicilian Expedition, The Second War, Athens recovers, Lysander triumphs, Athens surrenders, Aftermath. That's a total of 29 paragraphs with no references. Imo the reviewer did the right thing failing the article, and you should respond to the reviewer when an issue is dealt with. M3tal H3ad 10:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
    How should I re-word it? I oppose the failure of the article's GA status. Diez2 16:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
    last sentence says you don't think it deserves GA status. M3tal H3ad 06:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
    In my dictionary, "do" is the opposite of "don't"...? / Fred-Chess 12:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
    Haha i read it wrong, what a smart dictionary! :) M3tal H3ad 12:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment In-line citations are not requisite for an article to be a "good article" (see WP:WIAGA). I'd make sure the article is in top shape by following the suggestions offered by the reviewer and M3tal H3ad and if you believe it's good, re-submit it for consideration.Nja247 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
      Citations are required for information that is challenged or likely to be challenged. M3tal H3ad 07:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
      It would be helpful to provide examples; most of this is straight Thucydides and much of the rest is almost certainly consensus of the (cited) sources. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
      Comment. Being the editor that failed the article I'll give my opinion. I gave the editors the maximum of 7 days to follow the instructions. During that time I regularly checked the article to see if there were any improvements. When I put the article on hold it had 22 citations and I asked for more. I also asked for the aftermath section to be expanded. I am normally linient with my review but from what I saw none of my instructions were carried out so I decided to fail the article. And I still stand by my opinion and I think the article needs some work before it becomes GA. Kyriakos 01:37, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
    • fail but a GA should cite references and GA is defacto moving to inline like FA, like it or not.Rlevse 03:43, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
    • DelistSumoeagle179 12:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
    • delist, too much info needed citing / Fred-Chess 23:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
    Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../p/e/l/Talk%7EPeloponnesian_War_cc45.html"