Talk:Byzantine–Sasanian wars

message: Its a start that I hope and expect will be modified. In the mean time, I will try to make some maps refelecting the front in the various wars. 
I also named the first part of the conflict "Transition war" because its a transition from Roman --> to Byzantine and Parthian --> to Sassanid.
The last war I called a war of exahustion. If there are official labels, we'll use those. They did both exhaust each other.
If the Falklands war was a British victory and it was a counter attack reclaiming what it had, then so was this war in which the Persians failed to take the Eastern Provinces.Tourskin 04:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Start 

message: If the article is disputed, should not the article remain untouched until the dispute is resolved? To that end, it should be restored to how the author (me!) had it in the first place, that is, as a Roman victory. Then after we resolve the dispute, we should change it, if necessary and with some sources and evidence. That means you Ajerbaijani! No offence intended. Tourskin 04:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, that above comment made no sense at all. We should keep the article neutral until an agreement is made, not have the article be the way you like it until an agreement is made. What evidences have you brought that says that the Byzantines won the entire Byzantine Sassanid wars? None. How can there be a clear victory in a series of conflicts which lasted hundreds of years?Azerbaijani 15:11, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

text: What do you mean it made no sense? If something is disputed, you don't edit it before the dispute is over. The article said Roman victory before the dispute. So it should remain that way until the dispute is over.Tourskin 19:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Do you know what a stalemate even is? Its when you and your opponent can not make a decisive move. Like North Korea, where the Chinese and UN were at stalemate, or World war 1. However, the Byzantines threatened Ctesiphon at the end of the war. The Persians were winning the war but then they lost. Tourskin 20:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Azerbaijani, I am not denying that the Sassanids were more than a match, Just the final outcome was victorius for Romans.Tourskin 04:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original 

message: I have made quite a bit of edits for just general proofreading. But there is still a load left. This article needs more proofreaders. I'm also going to add to the warbox, it seems rather short.--Arsenous Commodore 23:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proofread 

message: You know what, this war has exhausted me. Do with it as anyone will's. Tourskin 04:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Tourskin don't feel too bad, after all it also exhausted the Romans and Persians, LOL.--Arsenous Commodore 15:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hell... 

message: Does this war have a name in scholarly writing? Or is "Byzantine-Sassanid Wars" a Wikipedian neologism? Srnec 04:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. No, it is not a Wikipedian neologism and it is used in scholarly sources. "Byzantine-Sassanid Wars" is just a descriptive title for a series of wars each of which has its own name.--KoberTalk 04:42, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly "Byzantine-Sassanid" is a descriptive term, but is it also a commonly applied scholarly term which can only refer to this series of conflicts? And can you provide a source? (The article is severly short on those.) Srnec 04:48, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I did a quick research through books.google. The term, in its various forms, is certainly used by scholars: "Byzantine-Sasanian Wars" (5 hits), "Byzantine-Sassanian wars" (2), "Byzantine-Sassanid wars" (2), "Byzantine-Sasanid wars" (1), "Roman-Sasanian wars" (2),  "Roman-Sassanian wars" (1). Personally, I would much prefer to move the article to Roman-Sassanid Wars b/c there is still no consensus on exactly when the "Byzantine" era of Roman history began. --KoberTalk 05:25, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW, I have just found Template:Campaignbox Roman-Sassanid Wars.--KoberTalk 05:31, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So is Anastasian War a proper name for a specific phase of the long wars between the Byzantines and the Persians? (B/c I capitalised the "w" in war.) My only concern with the title is that it be a proper name for the war if scholars have one and that it be the best decriptive term for this series of wars if there is no common scholarly term for the whole. Srnec 17:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I'd suggest just destroying this article altogether, and allowing the Roman-Persian Wars do the whole talking. Of course we can take some of the valuable info from here and transport it. But I simply see no reason to have this summarized, unsourced and weak article simply exist when we have a more concise, detailed and sourced article on the whole conflict.--Arsenous Commodore 18:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: This article discusses about probable raids into Cyrenaica and Nubia after the capture of Egypt by the Sasanians. --Z 13:44, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exact geographical extent of the conflict in Africa