Talk:List of oldest continuously inhabited cities

message: Umm ... how is Rome not on this list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:3470:2670:187B:25CD:F254:857C (talk) 17:57, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Furius took care of it (diff). Demetrios1993 (talk) 02:36, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rome 

message: The Europe table is seriously outdated, so I propose the following change in the Top 5 based on the most recent results from carbon dating. This proposal meets the standard used for most (if not all) entries of this article: (1) that a place was a human habitat in the scientifically established past, and (2) that the same place is inhabited by humans today. (Please refrain from demanding to see references on continuous settlements at these places, as that would seek to impose a standard too high/impossible to meet since no one can know for sure if a place had been occupied or vacated during all days of every year of every decade of every century of every millennium, so such demands would not be following the standard used for most entries, and WP:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue.) Note how vividly the old entries for Pogradec (Albania) and Argos (Greece) depict/expose the article's low standard (so much so that, if the carbon dating were a requirement for inclusion, those two would probably not make it into the list). AuoueioA (talk) 00:41, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The high standard of continuously inhabited part was imposed by the nature of the list itself, as this is a list of oldest continuously inhabited cities. Also, your list is based on a book about neolithic Bosnia and an article about an albanian location. Much larger databases are needed (eg. 14SEA covers all the southeast Europe). C messier (talk) 21:54, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

text: Also, you made a mistake, Date BP means Before Present, not BC. C messier (talk) 22:02, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal for Europe's new Top 5 

message: I did go through the cited sources before i removed the items you added. I know your edits were done in good faith; however, just because the sources describe different historical periods, it doesn't necessarily mean that the cities have been continuously inhabited without any interruption. We can cite similar sources for just about any city that exists since antiquity; that doesn't mean they were continuously inhabited. In order for a city to be included in the article, a reliable source should say something along the lines of "city X has been continuously inhabited since Y"; otherwise, it is essentially a violation of WP:SYNTHESIS. There was a recent discussion about this. For example, from the source for Fasa, we read:
*
First of all, the antiquity of Fasa cannot be used to support the claim of continuous habitation since these early periods. Furthermore, you arbitrarily chose the Achaemenid period, which lasted from approximately 550 to 330 BC, and then, again arbitrarily, added  BC to mark the beginning of the continuous habitation. Besides that, even if we were to follow your rationale, we also have quotes like the following, which bring into question the claim of continuous habitation:
*
It is similar with the other three items you reinstated. If the authors don't explicitly describe these towns as continuously inhabited since a certain period, then we are essentially doing improper editorial synthesis. If these cities have been continuously inhabited since the purported periods, which they very well could be, then it shouldn't be hard finding reliable sources supporting the claims in a plain manner. Demetrios1993 (talk) 01:50, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent additions 

message: Why is Jericho not on here? 10,000BC  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.145.253.33 (talk) 04:41, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jericho 

message: This article is terribly formatted. 
It shouldn't be divided by continent, but instead have absolute values. 
Other articles, like world's tallest mountains, include this information and have the region as a separate field in the chart, so you can sort it by region, age, etc.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.145.253.33 (talk) 04:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article makes no sense 

message: Jericho, Damascus and Urfa are continuously inhabited since 11000-10000 years before present. 178.246.234.156 (talk) 11:35, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The first two are already listed, and the latter may be included with a reliable reference to support the claim. Mindmatrix 13:55, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  There older continuously inhabited cities 

message: Can you please verify if the article by Ramli & Nik Abdul Rahman (2010) that was cited by the IP (diff), supports the claim of continuous habitation since 200 BC? You can access their article ; it is written in Malay. The second reference they added was to the book A Survey of South-East Asian Prehistory (1976) by Robert L. Hoover, which unfortunately also lacks a precise page number; however, the only mentions of Klang appear to be on page 30, in the following passage, which doesn't support the claim of continuous habitation:
*
Thanks in advance for your time. Demetrios1993 (talk) 16:53, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Klang (city) 

message: Lin a village in southeastern Albania is believed to been built at least 8500 years ago by carbon dating by neutral foreign archaeologists.Don't do politics in history,just that Greece might have the oldest,it was removed by a Greek for political reasons.Re add Lin village from Albania as top 1. 79.106.33.71 (talk) 20:20, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Demetrios1993 (talk) 13:23, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is Lin village removed from this list when it has been inhabited for 8500 years.