Talk:Fall of Babylon

Untitled

This page was created from contents of articles found at:

• Babylonia
• Neo-Babylonian Empire
• Belshazzar's feast
• The writing on the wall

  — Jason Sosa 23:47, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Just wondering if there is an error or some missing information here, as Cyrus did not enter the city before his soldiers. It currently reads like this:

... on 12 October... the soldiers of Cyrus entered Babylon without fighting... Cyrus arrived in Babylon on 3 October, Gobryas having acted for him in his absence...

SedesGobhani (talk) 03:52, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Link

Reverted cited link sends to 404gotten Project. Not WP:RS. Tgeorgescu (talk) 22:18, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Cyrus was viewed as a legitimate successor of babelonian kings ?!

The author who made this claim used cited from “Roux 1992, pp. 381–382; Oates 1986, pp. 134–135.“

When i checked the sources he cited babylon and ancient-iraq, non of it had anything related to such claims, i removed the sources and removed this claim or more precisely “personal opinion” and asked whoever want to add that claim to provide a source or a quote that mentions a such claim first, but for some reason R Prazeres reverted my edit without providing any reason for doing so Ibn Siwa (talk) 21:16, 6 January 2023 (UTC) <--- blocked sock of User:Amr.elmowaled

"After the death of Nabu-na'id, the pro-Persian Babylonians, anxious to please their new sovereign, did everything in their power to sully his memory." - Roux 1992, pp. 381–382

..."when that city finally fell, Cyrus is said to have been hailed as a liberator, freeing the people from the tyranny of Nabonidus. / the army of Cyrus entered Babylon without a battle / It would appear that Cyrus' liberal religious views were welcomed after the discontent aroused by the heresies of Nabonidus." Oates 1986, pp. 134–135.

Perhaps that needs to be rewritten a bit, but you removed/changed more than just the "legitimate successor" bit [1]. Also, have you by any chance edited in Wikipedia from another account before? --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:29, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

The reasons for reverting have been explained to you; you edit-warred instead of coming to the talk page, which you should have done first. When there's a disagreement, it's up to you to explain yourself further. I've already explained this on your user talk page as well. As for the text in question: I was going to essentially say and quote the same thing as HistoryofIran. I'll let them and other editors who have contributed to this article follow up with the rest and discuss whether details of the wording in question (like "legitimate successor") could use some adjusting or trimming, but it's certainly false to claim that the cited sources have nothing to say about it. R Prazeres (talk) 21:37, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

:::Okay so shall we remove this “legitimate successor” claim since we all agree that the sources doesn’t say that ? Ibn Siwa (talk) 21:51, 6 January 2023 (UTC) <--- blocked sock of User:Amr.elmowaled

Care to first explain why you removed/changed the other stuff? And please dont avoid my question: have you by any chance edited in Wikipedia from another account before? HistoryofIran (talk) 22:13, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

:::::This is not a place for having a personal talk, please focus on the subject, if you want to have a “chat” with me or ask something about me write it on my personal talks page, do you agree that we should remove the “legitimate successor” claim ? Ibn Siwa (talk) 22:37, 6 January 2023 (UTC) <--- blocked sock of User:Amr.elmowaled

Is it that hard to answer with a simple yes or no? And my first question wasn’t even personal but directly related to this topic, yet you avoided that as well. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:42, 6 January 2023 (UTC)