hi i do not wish to argue however in the article itself it implicitly mentions how the greeks retreated to mathura from pataliputra many times in the article which is sourced therefore by logic mathura should definately be within the border i am not fabricating original research as it is all already in the article it would be appropriate if you were to provide sources contradicting their occupation of such areas within those dates if the article is wrong as for the lines drawn as far as i've seen in books they are only used to show the movement of armies in detailed books of military campaigns and are never shown on a map depicting the extent of a kingdom as mentioned before due to the other articles following such a rule the border should enclose pataliputra as an occupation period of years is enough i think especially if many other pages include territories that have been held for only a year and these articles mentioned above have been peer reviewed