Talk:Basiliscus

message: Odoacer article says this coin celebrates Zeno.--213.141.142.41 13:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The coin 

message: Is it apt to refer to Basiliscus as a Byzantine Emperor? I realize the dividing line is somewhat arbitrary, and open to debate, but wherein the Western Roman Empire did not fall until after Basiliscus became emperor in the east, does this not make him still at least an Eastern Roman Emperor by modern description? Hiberniantears 18:04, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roman, Eastern Roman, or Byzantine? 

message: I am deleting the picture given of Ayasofya (present name of Hagia Sophia) because it is totally inappropriate for this article. The photo given is of doubtful imagination; just a photo reconstructed by eliminating the minarets. It does not depict the real Ayasofya as it exists at present. It does not represent the Ayasofya reconstructed by Justinian either. It had undergone many repairs after repeated earthquake damage (at 552, 859, 994, 1317 etc.) Especially the buttresses shown on the imaginary photo were added in 1317. Thus, it definitely is not in the shape of the cathedral, which was constructed by the architect Rufinius during the reign of Arcadius at 415 in shape of a basilica with a wooden roof, which was the Hagia Sophia that Basiliscus took refugee in.Noyder (talk) 10:05, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Supposed picture of Ayasofya

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Basiliscus. 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/20060818172605/http://www.earlychristianwritings.com:80/fathers/zachariah05.htm to http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/fathers/zachariah05.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:47, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Basiliscus. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/fathers/zachariah05.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060822010105/http://www.ancientlibrary.com/smith-bio/index.html to http://www.ancientlibrary.com/smith-bio/index.html
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) 23:38, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Smith wrote in 1870 and gives credence to the ancient sources, much like Will Durant did. The other ref is the DIR website - which is not bad but is just an amateur site. Modern reference works, which reflect the actual capacity of the East-Roman Empire at this time, should be used.  I am away from my private library for the immediate future, but I'm sure others would kick in to re-align this portion of the operation against the Vandals. Yes, it was a large military operation, but not in those numbers - I've tagged the statement accordingly. 50.111.10.215 (talk) 07:29, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  10,000 ships! 100,000 soldiers! needs better sourcing for realistic numbers 

message: This article was slated to appear in OTD for 9 Jan (tomorrow) with the blurb:
* 475 – Basiliscus became Byzantine Emperor after Zeno was forced to flee Constantinople.
But it was pointed out that this is not sourced in the article (which appears to source only his coronation a few days later), and it has been removed, which is a pity as dates outside 19th–21st centuries are scarce. Can anyone help out here? Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 08:19, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  On this day 

message: Just to make anyone who watches this article aware, I plan to totally rewrite this article within my userspace, before nuking the article, as it's currently quite a big mess, and would not survive a FAR. At this point, getting out content whose source is lost/unreliable would be harder at this point than for me to just totally rewrite it. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:49, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nuking article 

message: If Marcus was co-emperor shouldn't this be marked in the lead and infobox? Marcus's own article has the latter (and he is included in the emperors nav box), but I don't know the protocol (or full context) for these sorts of things. Aza24 (talk) 06:04, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added it to the infobox; not sure his co-emperorship is important enough for the lede though. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 18:30, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough—you've done a marvelous job (as usual) restoring this article, by the way. Aza24 (talk) 19:29, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marcus