Talk:Polis

message: At the end of the first paragraph, someone added the following fragment:
:Probably originated from Sanskrit word "Palli" meaning "city".
I deleted it.
Aside from this being a fragment and not a complete sentence, it also makes a dubious unsourced claim.  I don't believe that there was any direct contact during antiquity between Greece and the Indian subcontinent until Alexander the Great.  While it's still remotely possible that this word was borrowed from Sanskrit, it's unlikely, and whoever wrote this could have at least provided a footnote and a source.  It's more likely that the Greek "polis" and Sanskrit "Palli" share a common Proto-Indo-European ancestor word, rather than Greek borrowing this word from Sanskrit.  
Let's please refrain from pulling shit out of our asses and posting it on Wikipedia. 
Skyduster (talk) 07:21, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Mr. Skyduster, I see you are still on. Now that you are 10 years older, would you not agree a more professional reply would soothe wounded feeling much better? Thank you.Botteville (talk) 13:18, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious connection between "Polis" and Sanskrit "Palli" 

message: This is just one of several cases I have come across recently. In my opinion, it would be very useful to include a "slang" section on words that have come to have very different meanings when used in the modern world. As a quick example, I am working on an essay for my English class, and in the essay the word 'polis' is used as such: "What could be more polis?" Using slang is always dangerous, because of the chance that readers will not be familiar with the same slang as the author. Adding a 'slang' section to Wikipedia - and possibly Wiktionary - articles would help alleviate, and maybe one day eliminate, this problem.
This page is a complete mess!!! Can some kind scholar of Ancient Greece re-do this??  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.87.35.108 (talk) 18:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slang 

message: I mean the sections on things derived from the term are longer, and there isn't much meat for the main topic of the article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.121.47.140 (talk) 21:50, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Might be nice to expand the section on the actual city-states 

message: its not true. he did establish cities all over but non of them was pure polis. some have been with deep greek culture but still - not pure polis.
so i allow my self to delete this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by SnoWolf404 (talk • contribs) 16:24, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  about that alexander founded polis 

message: Classical polis is only one sort of settlement and government in Greek antiquity. Neolithic, Bronze Age cities ,Mycenaean city-states, the city-state of Troy, cities during the Geometric Period, the city in the Greco-Roman world; all these subjects should have their own sections in the article.Catalographer (talk) 18:19, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Polis and history of city and human settlement in Greek antiquity

message: The article gives the impression that the polis was in decline.  In fact, many cities newly became poleis during the period, even Jerusalem for a while ("Antioch-at-Jerusalem").  Needs amending.  Marshall46 (talk) 11:16, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hellenistic period 

message: I can see everyone would like to know more about the polis. At the same time the article has at this point a a substantial rating at the bottom of the page. I have to ask myself why, as it says nothing much substantial. Moreover, there is a serious source problem. It claims to be copied from 1911 Britannica but that work has no such article or even anything like it. I did find some plagiarism from another work. This is actually legal plagiarism as the work is still in copyright, A history of the Greek world from 323 to 146 B.C. by Max Cary. This will have to be rewritten for accuracy and originality. I don't want to make a big deal about the plagiarism, as there is not all that much of it, but then there is not all that much of an article either. I will just gradually rewrite such of it as it copied, wrong or insubstantial, but I have to ask myself, what makes this article so popular? I believe the answer is in the comprehensive lists, a purely WP feature. People like list lookups. So, I will keep those features. If you like any other sort of thing be sure to mention it here so we can work it is or make sure it stays or if you want to work it in yourself, take a shot at it. WP of course relies on the experience of its editors so if you don't have all that much experience you must expect what you do to be checked and probably altered. That is just part of the WP game. No help for it. Intrinsic feature to the method.Dave (talk) 12:19, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Source problems

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Polis. 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/20110823154250/http://old.uchitel-izd.ru/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=47 to http://old.uchitel-izd.ru/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=47
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:57, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: We seem to have come to grinding halt on this article. I'm restarting it, but I've decided to skip the usual line-by-line attacks ad hominem, if you don't mind. So, you will find me reworking it on Page 2 of my personal sandbox. Say anything you like there. I expect to keep rewriting that for a while then I will pop it in. I find the lists rather skeletal and not always relevant. I know what I said years ago as Dave. However that seems to have kept us back. My prime recommendation is that we split all the lists of -polis places into a separate article, which I propose calling "List of place names incorporating Greek polis." Think it over, let me know. I'll interpret no reply as tacit assent.Botteville (talk) 19:12, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Article restart

message: I'd rather put this commentary here than make you run over to my place where the replacement is being developed.
* The first ref is bad. Page number wrong, the "polis" entry elsewhere says no such thing. None of the rest of the intro is referenced. I got a number of classics synopses on hand. I will use the definitions of polis in them to replace the intro.Botteville (talk) 03:30, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Commentary on the unreplaced article

message: More than a few weeks ago I proposed we split the word lists off. The upper half of the article is about defining the ancient polis. In my rewrite on page 2 of my sandbox I am continuing that theme. Not done yet. However as I have got no reply here I assume the usual case in true, people agree and so no one wants to bother to second, third, etc. the motion. So, I'm going ahead. My final title at the moment is "List of modern words containing Greek polis." It would be a list article. We aren't stuck with that name. We can request a change or if you have name-changing power you can just change it. Ciao.Botteville (talk) 13:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Article split

message: The Kome DAB page sends to this article ("Kome, a village of a Greek polis"), but the article has no mention at all of the term kōme. Arminden (talk) 15:14, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kome (kōme) is missing 

message: I see no objection to changing the article. I got the first half of it done in sand space so I'm going to start putting it over before I start to forget it. Oh yes, the kome. It is only a small part of a whole lot of missing concepts but I do cover it.Botteville (talk) 04:49, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Putting the article over

message: I finished writing this thing down to history of the polis. I will get what I have done in. The rewrite addresses two basic deficits: the change of direction instigated by the Copenhagen polis project, and the absence of Aristotle. I did keep the section on Plato. So, most of the work went into definition of the polis. I find the number of pages getting uncomfortably high. This is really to be expected. For one thing, Aristotle is the major theorist on poleis, and he wasn't there at all. For another, the major Copenhagen report is over 1000 pages long. They are letting us download it if we can find it somewhere. I don't see how I can diminish my pages and still keep an adequate definition in. But, the article covers mainly the history of the models, not the history of the polis. My solution at this point is to put the history of the polis in another article. So, unless there is another suggestion, I will finish this up and start "History of the polis" in the same sandbox as I had this.Botteville (talk) 15:22, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Need 2 articles