Talk:Artaxerxes I

Untitled

Anonymous user created a small article - now a redirect here Longimanus. But the aricle does not mention the name, please inclusde it here as you see appropriate–Gnomz⁰⁰⁷(?) 05:56, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

done, the bible backgound could be lengthened and there is a great deal of external information available... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.27.140.134 (talk • contribs) .

Date of death 423 rather than 424

Badian From Plataea to Potidaea (1993) pp.79-80 argues that 424 is based on a misreading of Thucydides 4.50-2. 423 is supported by texts in the Murasu archive.

Name inconsistencies

"Artakhshastra" is used at the top, and in the text, "Artakhshasta" (without the 'r') is used as the transliteration of the hebrew. Are they referring to different things, or is one incorrect? Could someone please correct? --Storkk 22:25, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

OK. I see it's the persian that is being transliterated. My bad. --Storkk 12:27, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Dehellenization

Being a rampant Hellenist, it pained me to change Themistokles to Themistocles. Yet, it is incongruous to have this being the one and only Hellenized entry on this page. Mfryc 21:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Fratricide

His murder of his brother Hystaspes is not mentioned at all (mentioned at their father's article). — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ  Contribs. 22:29, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Non Biblical information

A majority of this article describes the king through the lens of only the Bible - there's too much Bible and not enough information about his actual reign. This doesn't mean that the Bible section needs to be axed, instead, there needs to be another section based on his reign from a non religious standpoint. He was a Persian king - there's gotta be more information about his reign (such as the death of his father and the rebellions he faced throughout his reign). And any other information relating to his own religion - Zoroastrianism. -Jonathan

Fifth/sixth.

I noticed that the opening sentence of the article on Xerxes I reads:

"Xerxes I of Persia <snip> also known as Xerxes the Great (519–465 BC), was the fifth of the king of the kings of the Achaemenid Empire".

The opening sentence of this article reads:

"Artaxerxes I <snip> was the fifth King of Kings of Persia from 465 BC to 424 BC. He was the son of Xerxes I of Persia and Amestris, daughter of Otanes".

Which is somewhat contradictory.

In the interests of consistency and clarity, I've edited this article so that it reads:

Artaxerxes I /ˌɑrtəˈzɜrksiːz/ (Persian: اردشیر یکم; Old Persian: 𐎠𐎼𐎫𐎧𐏁𐏂𐎠 Artaxšaça,[1] "whose rule (xšaça < *xšaϑram) is through arta (truth)";[2] Greek: Ἀρταξέρξης[3]) was the fifth (or sixth, if one counts Bardiya, who may have reigned for a few months in 522 BC, in between the reigns of Cambyses II and Darius I) King of Kings of Persia from 465 BC to 424 BC."

Hope that's OK. Gnu Ordure (talk) 21:46, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

A troubling observation

I've noticed several articles on Classical Persia with little to no reference to Zoroastrianism when there was in the past. Is this part of a campaign? It needs to be stopped: from the Encyplopedia Iranica article "It has been suggested that under Artaxerxes, about 441 B.C., a new and distinctly Zoroastrian calendar, copying the Egyptian one, was promulgated in the empire" Nothing overblown, but relevant nonetheless. It is more relevant to mention his religion for Wikipedia which is a general encyclopedia as one imagines that the editors and readers of specialized encyclopedias take certain basic, essential, facts for granted: Artaxerxes was bipedal, for instance, is probably on par with his Zoroastrian religion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:1800:6D:E175:9D4C:4363:D2D2 (talk) 03:21, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Role of NF1 as stated in the Medical analysis section is pure conjecture; I respectfully suggest that it be removed .

I am a cancer biologist and familiar with the gene. What is suggested in the "Medical analysis" section is pure conjecture. The cited article is published in a very specific context in a journal with a specific impact profile. The suggestion undermines the accuracy of other sections. I respectfully suggest that it be either fully detailed or preferably removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mneshat (talk • contribs) 05:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Inaccurate Information

The article says "Although this decree is assumed to have occurred on 13 March 444 B.C, the Biblical passage does not state an exact date nor has any historical record been found to confirm it." Yet the Bible clearly states it was given in the 21st year of Artaxerxes I. Do we not know when Artaxerxes began his reign? Since we do, the date is not an assumption, and the Bible does state "an exact date". How can we reword this or should we simply remove it? AChildOfGod ^{(Talk | Contribs | Bible Wiki)} 15:51, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Removed it. A reference to the nearest year in the bible does not give sufficient accuracy for a date to a specific date. There is no reference for the assumption.5.198.10.236 (talk) 11:49, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Artaxerxes I of Persia. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151001032753/http://plutarch.classicauthors.net/PlutarchsLives/PlutarchsLives3.html to http://plutarch.classicauthors.net/PlutarchsLives/PlutarchsLives3.html

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) 18:03, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

445 BC

Click on the Google Books links, they all say the same: 445 BC. 446 BC is thus erroneous information. We abide by WP:VER and WP:RS. POV warriors don't, we don't like them. Tgeorgescu (talk) 00:09, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

POV-pusher

We have a POV-pusher who replaces Cyrus with Kores or Koresh, in order to beg the WP:OR question that the Koresh in Hebrew would not mean Cyrus in English, which is simply put, ludicrous. Tgeorgescu (talk) 02:10, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

@94.210.116.247: Wikipedia is not the outlet for pushing such POV. Tgeorgescu (talk) 05:07, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Agreed with Tgeorgescu. Thanks for having reverted this POV pushing IP.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:13, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Ok, here is our reason:

Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought Wikipedia is not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses or to publish new information. Per our policy on original research, please do not use Wikipedia for any of the following:

1. Primary (original) research, such as proposing theories and solutions, original ideas, defining terms, coining new words, etc. If you have completed primary research on a topic, your results should be published in other venues, such as peer-reviewed journals, other printed forms, open research, or respected online publications. Wikipedia can report your work after it is published and becomes part of accepted knowledge; however, citations of reliable sources are needed to demonstrate that material is verifiable, and not merely the editor's opinion.

1. Personal essays that state your particular feelings about a topic (rather than the opinions of experts). Although Wikipedia is supposed to compile human knowledge, it is not a vehicle to make personal opinions become part of such knowledge. In the unusual situation where the opinions of an individual are important enough to discuss, it is preferable to let other people write about them. (Personal essays on Wikipedia-related topics are welcome in your user namespace or on the Meta-wiki.)

Therefore we're not interested in the original research or personal findings of the IP. His own conclusions simply do not belong inside Wikipedia. He should have gotten this point long ago. The IP seems to have two main hobbies: entering factually incorrect information (see #445 BC) and spreading FUD about Koresh means Cyrus in English, possibly in order to advance a POV about when the Temple got built. I think the IP is a WP:SOCK of Evert Wandelaar, he locates to an IP in the Netherlands and the indeffed username is Dutch. Tgeorgescu (talk) 05:37, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm, thank you very much for your insight Tgeorgescu, i did not realize that he was a sock of a registered user.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 13:09, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

457 B.C. (Fall), 7th Year of Artaxerxes I Longimanus/Machrocheir - Exact Chronological Dating established by numerous sources, why was this undone?

457 B.C. (Fall), 7th Year of Artaxerxes I Longimanus/Machrocheir - Exact Chronological Dating established by numerous astronomical, historical and scientific sources (Why was this undone, as citing "comments in article"? No comments were given, only the date (457 B.C.) and sources/references):

Ptolemy's Canon (Claudius Ptolemaeus), section Artaxerxes I - https://www.livius.org/articles/concept/ptolemys-canon/

VAT 5047 (No. -453 in ADT I), dated to year 11 of Artaxerxes I (454/453 BCE). - http://kristenfrihet.se/kf3/Chronology%20Persia.%20Furuli%27s%20Response%20to%20COJ%20Examined.htm

LBAT 1419 (No. 4 in ADT V), with one entry dated to year 21 of Xerxes (465/464 BCE). - http://kristenfrihet.se/kf3/Chronology%20Persia.%20Furuli%27s%20Response%20to%20COJ%20Examined.htm

LBAT 1387+1388+1486 (No. 56 in ADT V), mainly dated to the reign of Artaxerxes I. - http://kristenfrihet.se/kf3/Chronology%20Persia.%20Furuli%27s%20Response%20to%20COJ%20Examined.htm

Saros Tablets - LBART *1419; Accession of Artaxerxes I, pages 80-81, citing, J. N. Strassmaier in reports in ZA, VII [1892], 200, 201; VIII [1893], 106) - https://www.andrews.edu/library/car/cardigital/Periodicals/AUSS/1968-1/1968-1-05.pdf

The Chronology of Ezra 7 (1953), Siegfried H. Horn, Ph.D; Lynn H. Wood, Ph.D, page 28-30 (Conclusion) - http://www.friendsofsabbath.org/Further_Research/e-books/THE%20CHRONOLOGY%20OF%20EZRA%207%20(Siegried%20H%20Horn).pdf

Elephantine Papyri - Siegfried H. Horn and Lynn H. Wood, "The Fifth-Century Jewish Calendar at Elephantine," JNES 13 (1954):14-16 - http://adamoh.org/TreeOfLife.wan.io/Treasures/Siegfried_Horn_and_Lynn_Wood-The_Fifth_Century_Jewish_Calendar_at_Elephantine.pdf

208.147.18.9 (talk) 04:53, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 7 December 2020

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: Consensus to move (non-admin closure) BegbertBiggs (talk) 23:32, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

---

• Artaxerxes I of Persia → Artaxerxes I
• Xerxes II of Persia → Xerxes II
• Sogdianus of Persia → Sogdianus
• Artaxerxes II of Persia → Artaxerxes II

– No other notable rulers with these names. --HistoryofIran (talk) 02:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 14:26, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

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.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Inarus, killed by Artaxerxes I.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:59, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Inarus, killed by Artaxerxes I.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:38, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

WP:ERA

@StAnselm: At https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Artaxerxes_I&type=revision&diff=541687973&oldid=539417852&diffmode=source it was a BCE article. tgeorgescu (talk) 06:28, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

It was a BC article originally. StAnselm (talk) 06:29, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

There is a RfC about it, which is going nowhere, at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. tgeorgescu (talk) 06:37, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about that - I hadn't seen it. StAnselm (talk) 14:12, 2 May 2022 (UTC)