Jump to content

Talk:Olympia, Greece

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ruins of Olympia and avatar

[edit]

Shouldn't the ruins of Olympia be identified on the Avatar for this page? 74.12.12.98 21:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC) Joseph Caron[reply]

Distinction between Olympia and (Mount) Olympus, Olympian Gods, etc

[edit]

It might be useful (it would have been to me as a student) to note that this is not the Mount Olympus whence the Olympian Gods. I don't know how to do the links, etc.140.184.192.117 15:40, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Location Coordinates

[edit]

The location coordinates do not appear to be correct. Google Earth locates the site at 37.63N, 21.63E —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.70.10.197 (talk) 14:50, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Quote: "1950 to present. Between 1952 and 1966, Kunze and Schleif continued the excavation joined by architect Alfred Mallwitz". Hans Schleif committed suicide in Berlin in 1945, when Russian forces conquered the city. (He was a high ranking member of the SS). English is not my native language, thus I do not want to edit the page myself. Could somebody else do so? - Wilhelm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.14.238.106 (talk) 13:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Destruction By Tsunami

[edit]

Science Daily article, 2011-Jul-10, explaining the likely destruction of Olympia by tsunami.
"Olympia Hypothesis"
— al-Shimoni (talk) 13:26, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Length of Olympic games

[edit]

In the opening paragraph the article says:

"Both games were held every Olympiad (i.e. every four years), the Olympic Games dating back possibly further than 776 BC. In 394 AD, (after exactly 1169 years) emperor Theodosius I abolished them as they were then considered reminiscent of paganism."

Besides the fact that there are no citations for either date (there is one on the Olympiad page for the 776 B.C.E. date:

Bickerman (1980), p.75. Elias J. Bickerman (1980). Chronology of the Ancient World (Aspects of Greek & Roman Life) (2nd sub ed.). Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press. ISBN 0-8014-1282-X.

So, it might be worth adding that here. The other issue, is the two sections I've bolded. They seem to be either contradictory or at least confusing. I'd argue that the parenthetical should be removed because it provides useless information. This is especially true if the fact is that the Olympics 'possibly' date back further than 776 B.C.E. though there is no evidence for that claim on the page.

I'll probably make the edit if I don't hear any reasons not to.

What do you think?

Ben Woodring (talk) 20:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Split off to separate article for ancient Olympia

[edit]

If a city is continuously inhabited, such as Athens for example, we discuss the ancient history of that city in it's history section. As far as I know this is the common principle for all Wikipeda articles on ancient and modern cities, even if it might not be an official rule. However, this article does not conform to the rule because it discusses both the ancient city and the modern city. I suggest we keep the information about the modern city in this article and split off the information about the ancient city to a new article. Maybe Olympia (ancient). What do you think? --AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 17:09, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hah. Not one word on this topic by anyone in 8 years. Not the summum of popularity and interest. My experience is different. There is no rule formal or informal. Most of these community articles start as stubs so they would include both until they got big enough to split. Is this one big enough? I don't know. Up for discussion. There is a lot more to be said on the ancient side if anyone cares to say it. Wait and see some more I guess.Botteville (talk) 03:51, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Olympia, Greece. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 07:08, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Olympia, Greece. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 03:54, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Altis here

[edit]

Essentially two names for the same place. Johnbod (talk) 18:04, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Well, after 10 days, I think the community has spoken. Johnbod (talk) 02:43, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There is one and only one question that matters. What would best help our readers?
Some readers might want to know about ancient Altis, or about the chryselephantine statue of Zeus (one of the Seven Wonders of the World), or about the site of the ancient Olympic games. Others might want to read about the modern town (which as I remember from when I visited the place in 1970, was most notable from its bus station and a couple of decent tavernas). Narky Blert (talk) 21:24, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, Statue of Zeus at Olympia gets some 1,500 views a day. We have Delphi on the ancient site, and Delphi (modern town) (a good deal larger place I think). Johnbod (talk) 02:31, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Uncertain I am not certain. Altis seem to be exclusively about the ancient sanctuary, this about the town/community, also the modern one. If that is the case, a temple should have its own article, separate from the article of the town. But I don't have the time to engage in a discussion. --Aciram (talk) 13:06, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nor to look at the articles, it seems - see Category:Ancient Olympia. I wouldn't be averse to splitting-off the bits on the modern municipality, currently stuffed at the end of this, but that is a different question. At most a sentence or two would be added by merging with Altis. Johnbod (talk) 13:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Altis wasn't a temple. It was an earlier name for the same inhabited place. Narky Blert (talk) 21:08, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments and questions

[edit]

1. The "Ancient site" section could be improved. The description does not flow well.

2. "Treasuries. I. Sicyon, II. Syracuse, III. Epidamnus(?), IV. Byzantium(?), V. Sybaris(?), VI. Cyrene(?), VII. Unidentified, VIII. Altar(?), IX. Selinunte, X. Metapontum, XI. Megara, XII. Gela."

None of this is shown on the map.

3. What is the difference between "Municipal unit" and "Municipality" in the "Historical population" table? It's unclear and not explained.

ICE77 (talk) 06:56, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty peculiar footnotes

[edit]

Reference 1 is pretty peculiar. You try to find out where the reference is and you can't. Though the superscript 1 points to ref 1 below, there is no sign of the ref-end ref that I can see. It is not in the edit for the infobox or anywhere else that I can see; furthermore, though there is a "b" as well as an "a" there is no sign of the second named ref. Or is it named? We don't know. The usual answer for this sort of mystery is that someone with access to the code creating infobox Greek Dimos put the code in for that ref. I never did like that infobox. It supplies all kinds of things it should not, including the reference for the population; moreover, in the write-up for that infobox there is not one word to enlighten us. This ain't right. There are two things wrong. First of all it sticks us with the ref in Greek, even though there ate perfectly good English translations. Second, it sticks us with the date of the population. Unless someone with access gets around to changing the ref in the code, we're stuck. In fact there was a 2021 update. My second gripe is that the notes use the same numbering system as footnotes, thus bypassing the very good system for distinguishing a separate run of notes from the usual footnotes. Apparently the box is correctable by changing the date and adding a note. I will try it. Also, I will change the note designator. We need more notes to explain such things as the difference between municipality and municipal unit. Such an explanation is requested above. In general, this is not the Greek WP it is the English, designed for English speakers.Botteville (talk) 11:39, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

International relations

[edit]

I commented out this section from perplexity over what else to do. In a nutshell, nothing credible is available on it. It is about the twin or sister cities of Olympia. The one reference has expired. The one blue link is to a list that does not include Olympia. If you try to look it up you can't find it. There is a problem with definition of sister city. There is an organization that registers sister cities but most sister cities do not use it. Also it is not the case of just one. Most have several. There are plenty of hints and suggestions: so and so feels that because of its Olympic game connections, city x and Olympia ought to be sisters. A sentiment is not a deal. When it gets right down to it there are no bona fide sister cities with signed deals with SOMEONE for Olympia. There is nothing authoritative, and most web sites that deal with it are blatently copying Wikipedia. Nothing in still equals nothing out (the general Wikipedia equation). If you find something with a credible reference, do put it in; otherwise, why should we carry confusion with a tag until doomsday?Botteville (talk) 01:17, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

[edit]

Sup Starcodsebee (talk) 12:05, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Herakleian Sanctuary Section Needs Help

[edit]

The section essentially only used Pindar. No other ancient or modern sources. And sentences such as: 'The space is a work of man created by a sequence of operations', and 'He cannot be defining it to exist, which it already does, and has existed, possibly long before.', have lead me to gradually suspect whoever wrote this section was insane...

Someone with expertise please rewrite this. There's so little relevant info and the author clearly had a bias concerning sacred groves or something that dominates the flow of the section. I started correcting it and ended up mangling it with citations because of how little actual content there is. 2600:1700:6B0:F990:9E4B:6FA4:9605:28C0 (talk) 21:34, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 26 September 2023

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved per WP:SNOW.(closed by non-admin page mover) estar8806 (talk) ★ 19:25, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

– Clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, as determined by WikiNav. 2001:4451:8272:C000:BCED:9629:CCD5:4BDF (talk) 05:52, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: pages with content, such as Olympia, are ineligible to be proposed titles in move requests unless they, too, are formally dispositioned. "Olympia → Olympia (disambiguation)" has been added to this request to meet that requirement. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 11:56, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And that's only Wikinav which is not the right tool PAGEVIEWS clearly shows that there is no primary and Olympia Greece isn't even first In ictu oculi (talk) 07:25, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. No primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:07, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lean oppose, although I would say that this is the primary topic by long-term significance. By page views it seems not to be. Because there are so many other Olympias, some of them fairly significant and well-known, disambiguation is preferable. I would distinguish this from say, Alexandria, which is far more likely to be the search target than all but one or two of its namesakes, and still more likely than those. P Aculeius (talk) 12:44, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. No primary topic, per others. Even the nominator's WikiNav, which as has been said is not the right way to determine this, does not show anything like enough of a supermajority of views. Johnbod (talk) 13:57, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose move. It's close, but doesn't reach the mark to be a primary topic. O.N.R. (talk) 00:01, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • That WikiNav page shows there were 1.5k incoming views, 1.1k identifiable in clickstreams, and 13 outgoing destinations with 780 identified clickstreams. Out of that, the largest single block was the 219 that went to the proposed primary topic, but it is followed by 160 for the US location, 108 for the Manet painting, 83 for the given name (split out because of WP:NAMELIST - if it wasn't there'd probably be much more), etc. To use this to claim a primary topic is "determined" by it, it's just silly. I'm not sure if this is an actual anonymous newbie or a very elaborate troll, as this request comes shortly after I had updated WP:D text to try to give hints as to how to interpret WikiNav correctly :) (Speedy close) --Joy (talk) 08:54, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the Manet has 17,380 views and the capital of Washington has 12,950 (though US settlements commonly include the state) compared with only 14,377[[1]] for the place in Greece. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:16, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Capital of Washington shares it's name. Always beleive in hope (talk) 01:48, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Olympia,_Greece&oldid=1242883993"