Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of cities founded by Alexander the Great/archive1

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
• I'm not a historian and I haven't read the sources, but I can say that the writing is generally clear. Nice work.
• The links you've supplied for recension and bematists are helpful, but most readers usually don't click on most links, so a quick description for each would be helpful.

• I'm not entirely sure how to give a short description for recension, but I've done bematist.

• "Although it is incorrect that Alexander named all his foundations after himself": I don't think readers need to be disabused of this notion (at least, not before you've established that there are people who believe this); it's not something they're likely to assume in the first place.

• It is a rather common notion though, so I'll keep it if you don't mind.

• The "Location" column isn't sortable, and that's fine with me, because the table is short enough (at 13 rows) to make it easy to eyeball the whole thing. If other reviewers disagree (or if you create similar tables in the future that have more rows), then I'd probably suggest sorting on the modern-day name of whichever country the site is in.
• Per MOS:BC, it's "BC", not "B.C.".

• Fixed.

• I know that some people don't like "332–1 BC". My understanding is that WP:MOSNUM disallows it ("never 1881–882 or 1881–2"), but I'm aware that some historians insist on this notation. I'm just raising the issue so that other people can deal with it if they feel like dealing with it.

• Nope, I should have noticed that. Fixed.

• There's no requirement for a set number of images, but images can be useful in luring reviewers in to take a look at your work. Maps such as File:AlexanderIndiaMap.jpg might be useful.
• Opinions vary on how much self-reference is best in lists. Some reviewers reject descriptions such as "this is a list of ...", but others think that, phrased one way or another, you have to say what's in the list to meet the FLC criteria. "(see Other settlements below)" doesn't feel right to me, though.

• That has now been removed.

• "While first-century AD Pausanias, Pliny, and Aelius Aristides recorded traditions which held": too convoluted. Simplify.

• Was a typo. Fixed.

• The first and last two images need alt text.

• Done.

• Checking the FLC criteria:
• 1. I've done a little copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. I checked sorting on all sortable columns and sampled the links in the table. (There's an argument that the dates should sort in the reverse order, but I don't think that's important.)
• 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3b. The UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review; I'll peek in again after a source review is done). All relevant retrieval dates are present.
• 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
• 4. It is navigable.
• 5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine (except as mentioned above).
• 6. It is stable.

I don't know anything about the topic so I'll be inspecting the grammar :)

• "especially considering the possibility that a settlement started out as a military" ... Remove "out" superfluous
  • I'm just a reviewer (above), but I'll say this anyway: it's great that you took the time to go over this list in detail, TheUzbek, and I agree with a lot of what you're saying ... if I don't agree with every word, that's a relatively minor problem. Not being able to find enough reviewers is a major problem ... and different reviewers bring different skill sets to the table, and should always be appreciated and respected. But I do have a few specific replies, at least to your first few points. All the dictionaries that get cited a lot on Wikipedia support "started out", in the sense that the definition they give it is less ambiguous than the many definitions for "start", which makes "started out" a better choice if your goal is efficiency in helping the reader understand what you're saying. If the two of you decide you don't like the word "out", then there are other options (like "began"). Also, this is WP:FLC, not WP:FAC ... my understanding is that, even if it were true that there are a hundred words in this list that could be slightly improved on, there's nothing in the Featured List criteria that requires that everything in a long list of grammatical suggestions needs to get tackled before a promotion to WP:FL; you can take your time discussing these if you like. (Another way of saying this is: WP:FAOWN applies only to Featured Articles, not Featured Lists.) I think that's the prevailing opinion among reviewers here, but I could be wrong. - Dank (push to talk)
    • @Dank: I can't entirely agree with what you wrote, and as I said below: he can disagree; the only thing I ask for is an explanation for why the user opted to retain the original wording.
    • As for the quality standards needed to become FL, you are probably correct... My reply is: if it can improve, why not improve it? We shouldn't worry so much about the minimum standards required and focus more on making an article as good as possible.
    • As for "started out", this is more style than grammar. I like fewer words; I speak a Germanic language, and the fewer word in a sentence, the better. In the English language, it's more common with longer sentences. What is written is not grammatically incorrect.--TheUzbek (talk) 08:17, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Not done; "started out" emphasises the existence-aspect, which I wish to highlight.

• "sobriquets" change to "monikers" ... sobriquets is not a very used word, and I would assume the average reader wouldn't understand it.
  • Worth considering here is the ngram graph at Google Books ... sobriquet was actually much more common than moniker (in this graph) up until 1980 or so. I don't think it's a clear-cut decision ... my own style is to use more common words than either of these in FLs, but that's just me. - Dank (push to talk)
    • Interesting, as I said above, I'm not a native English speaker... If you say its more in use now I'd still use monikers over sobriquets, but yet again.. THis is more a suggestion than a must. --TheUzbek (talk) 08:17, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Not done; "moniker" is to me rather informal.

• "It does not include any posthumous foundations or refoundations" --> "It does not include any posthumous settlements or refoundations of settlements" ... Suggestion, not a must.

• Not done; why is this better?

• "Photograph of a ruined arch supported by metal structures, in countryside with open water in the distance." ---> "Photograph of a ruined arch supported by metal structures in the countryside with open water in the distance."

• Done

• "but it is likely that some of these names refer to the same city" --> "but some of these names likely refer to the same city"
  • I've seen a fair number of complaints over the years from Brits on Wikipedia that "likely" (as an adverb) doesn't work for them, and some qualify this by saying that it works if it has a modifier ... that is, "very likely refer" is more popular among some Brits than "likely refer". I also sometimes hear the same complaint from North Americans. Okay, sorry for the interruption ... carry on. - Dank (push to talk) 20:45, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • I write British English (or at the very least, I try to write British English), but the author of the list, if he writes American English, should, of course, retain American wording and sentence structure. I didn't know there was a difference between American and British English in this regard. One learns new things every day! --TheUzbek (talk) 08:17, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I am British, but Dank's comment isn't quite true. I'm fine with the alteration, but unsure why it's an improvement.

• "In Mesopotamia, Nikephorion (present-day Raqqa), was occasionally attributed to Alexander" ---> In "Mesopotamia, Nikephorion (present-day Raqqa) was occasionally attributed to Alexander"

• Done

• "However, the historian W. W. Tarn theorised that it was actually a foundation of Alexander" --> "However, the historian W. W. Tarn theorised that it was a foundation of Alexander"

• Done

• " This identification has been rejected by historians such as Cohen and Fraser." ---> " This identification is rejected by historians such as Cohen and Fraser."

• Done

• "It is probable that Perdiccas was ordered to settle the city" --> "Perdiccas was probably ordered to settle the city"

• Not done; slight change in meaning.

• "Josephus noted that the inhabitants regained their ruler's favour and were granted permission to rebuild their temple and defences." ---> "Finally, Josephus noted that the inhabitants regained their ruler's favour and were granted permission to rebuild their temple and defences."

• Not done; not sure what's final about Josephus.

• Whether the city was founded before or after Alexander's visit to the Siwa Oasis is disputed; his motives for founding Alexandria are also the subject of controversy ---> "Whether the city was founded before or after Alexander's visit to the Siwa Oasis is disputed; his motives for founding Alexandria are also controversial"

• Done

• "The settlement would later grow into one of the most important cities in the world, with an estimated population of 500,000–600,000 in 1 AD." ---> "Nevertheless, the settlement would later grow into one of the most important cities in the world, with an estimated population of 500,000–600,000 in 1 AD."

• Not done; not sure what the contrast with the previous sentence is that necessitates a "Nevertheless".

• ". However, the epigraphic, numismatic, and literary evidence is late, and it is very possible that the connection to Alexander was a later fabrication." --> ". However, the epigraphic, numismatic, and literary evidence is late, and it is possible that the connection to Alexander was a later fabrication."

• Not done; difference in meaning.

• " It is generally accepted that the city was located close to present-day Herat, which is situated in a fertile oasis and on several trade routes; its precise location is unknown because the city has not been excavated at all" --> "It is generally accepted that the city was close to present-day Herat, which is situated in a fertile oasis and on several trade routes; its precise location is unknown because the city has not been excavated"

• Done, and clarified sentence.

• "Alexandria Ariana has sometimes been identified as a refoundation of the Achaemenid settlement Artacoana, but as the available sources outline a clear distinction between the two localities, this is considered unlikely." --> "Alexandria Ariana has sometimes been identified as a refoundation of the Achaemenid settlement Artacoana, as the available sources outline a clear distinction between the two localities; this is considered unlikely."

• Not done; proposed sentence does not make sense.

• "Both Fraser and Cohen emphasise that the identification of the above names as the same city is an assumption, albeit strong. " --"Both Fraser and Cohen emphasise that identifying the above names as the same city is an assumption, albeit strong"

• Done

• "The construction of the city took three weeks, and it was settled with Greek mercenaries, local tribesmen, and injured Macedonian veterans. It has traditionally been identified with Khujand, which controlled the Bukhara-Samarkand trade route and the entrance to the fertile Ferghana Valley" ---> "The city's construction took three weeks and was settled with Greek mercenaries, local tribespeople, and injured Macedonian veterans. "

• Not done; I'm unsure if you mean the elimination of the second sentence or something else.

• "Excavations of the modern city have suggested that the site was occupied by the Achaemenids. " --> "Excavations of the modern city have suggested that the Achaemenids occupied the site. "

• Done

• "The existence of this settlement is attested to by all the major historians and Pliny, but none use its primary modern toponym. " --> "All the major historians and Pliny attest to the existence of this settlement, but none use its primary modern toponym. "

• Done

• "Alexander settled 7,000 natives here alongside 3,000 retired soldiers, after journeying from Prophthasia. " --> "Alexander settled 7,000 natives here alongside 3,000 retired soldiers after journeying from Prophthasia. "

• Done

• "There is however considerable debate on whether the settlement was truly founded by Alexander, or by the later Seleucids." --> "However, there is considerable debate on whether Alexander or the later Seleucids founded the settlement."

• Not done; why is this better?

• Better flow, less wordy and fewer commas

• Done.

• "The battle had taken place on the eastern bank, and so Alexander named the eastern city Nikaia" --> "The battle had taken place on the eastern bank, so Alexander named the eastern city Nikaia"

• Not done; why is this better?

• Less wordy

• Done

• "he gave the western city the name Bucephala, after his favourite stallion, who had recently died. " --> "he gave the western city the name Bucephala after his favourite stallion, who had recently died. "

• Removed the other comma.

• "Considering the marshy nature of the ground and the frequent monsoons, it is unlikely much archaeological evidence could be found. " --> Considering the marshy nature of the ground and the frequent monsoons, much archaeological evidence is unlikely to be found.

• Not done; changed meaning.

• "Arrian records that he approved of the location, and ordered Hephaistion and Leonnatus to construct and settle the city respectively. " --> "Arrian records that he approved of the location and ordered Hephaistion and Leonnatus to construct and settle the city, respectively. "

• Done.

• "while Curtius Rufus tells that its settlers came from Arachosia. " --> "while Curtius Rufus says that its settlers came from Arachosia. "

• Changed to "states".

• "Its purpose was likely to control trade routes, with a harbour for naval trade, and access to the strategically important mountain passes of the region. " --> "Its purpose was likely to control trade routes, with a harbour for naval trade and access to the strategically important mountain passes of the region. "

• Done.

• "Its location is in doubt, as the coastline has changed significantly since antiquity" --> "However, its location is in doubt, as the coastline has changed significantly since antiquity"

• Not done; nothing for the "however" to contrast against.

• "The foundation of the settlement was attested to by both Arrian and Pliny the Elder. " --> "Arrian and Pliny the Elder attested to the foundation of the settlement. "
• "Although probably located at Naysan in modern Iraq, the city's location has been disputed as the hydrography of the region has near-continuously changed since antiquity." ---> "Although probably located at Naysan in modern Iraq, the city's location has been disputed as the region's hydrography has near-continuously changed since antiquity."

• Done

• "Its location is unknown, other than it being located near Babylon in Lower Mesopotamia. " --> "Its location is unknown, besides being near Babylon in Lower Mesopotamia. "

• Clarified sentences.

• "If it existed, it may have been founded by the Seleucid " --> "If it existed, it might have been founded by the Seleucid "

• Not done; why is this better?

• Less wordy is in my mind 99 percent of the time better

• It's the same number of words...

• "Various scholars identify it as identical with other attested Alexandrias: these include Charax Spasinu, Seleucia-on-the-Hedyphon, Alexandria near the Pallakopas, or Alexandria on the Tigris." --> "Various scholars identify it as identical with other attested Alexandrias: Charax Spasinu, Seleucia-on-the-Hedyphon, Alexandria near the Pallakopas, or Alexandria on the Tigris."

• Clarified.

• "south-western " --> "southwestern "

• Done

• "The site of the settlement is not known, and some scholars have found its historicity questionable" ---> "However, the settlement's site is unknown, and some scholars have found its historicity questionable."

• Not done; why is this better?

• Shorter sentence.

• Done/

• ". "In 334 BC, Alexander visited Ilion, site of the ruined Troy. He ordered that the town be made exempt from taxes and that its buildings be rebuilt; he later promised to make the town a great city." ---> "In 334 BC, Alexander visited Ilion, the site of the ruined Troy. He ordered that the town be made exempt from taxes and its buildings be rebuilt; he later promised to make it a great city. "

• Done

• "Although it is certain that Alexander took a great interest in Priene (including dedicating the city's temple to Athena and granting exemptions to the populace), and even though it is probable that the town was refounded in the late fourth century, there is no direct evidence to claim Alexander carried it out. " --> "Although Alexander certainly took a great interest in Priene (including dedicating the city's temple to Athena and granting exemptions to the populace), and even though it is probable that the town was refounded in the late fourth century, there is no direct evidence to claim Alexander carried it out. "

• Done.

• "] While the later authors Pausanias, Pliny, and Aelius Aristides recorded traditions which held that Alexander refounded Smyrna, Strabo, writing in the first century BC, instead noted that the settlement was revived by Antigonus I Monophthalmus after Alexander's death." ---> "While the later authors Pausanias, Pliny, and Aelius Aristides recorded traditions which held that Alexander refounded Smyrna, Strabo, writing in the first century BC, instead noted that Antigonus revived the settlement I Monophthalmus after Alexander's death."

• Not done; ??????

• "Other settlements in the region, with much less viable claims, include Aegae, Alexandria by Latmos, Amorium, Apollonia, Chrysopolis, Eukarpia, Kretopolis, Nicaea, and Otrus" ---> "Other regional settlements, with much less viable claims, include Aegae, Alexandria by Latmos, Amorium, Apollonia, Chrysopolis, Eukarpia, Kretopolis, Nicaea, and Otrus"

• Not done; in the region =/= regional.

• "In Syria, the city of Antioch, later to become one of the major cities of the ancient world, claimed a relationship to Alexander. " ---> " In Syria, the city of Antioch, later to become one of the major cities of the ancient world, claimed a relationship with Alexander. "

• Fairly certain these sentences are identical.

• "with" and "to" ... that's the difference

• Done.

• "According to Libanius, a 4th-century AD native of the city, Alexander planned to found a city on the future site of Antioch, but did not have enough time to do so; he did however set up a shrine to Zeus and a small fortress. " --> "According to Libanius, a 4th-century AD native of the city, Alexander planned to found a city on the future site of Antioch but did not have enough time to do so; he set up a shrine to Zeus and a small fortress. "

• Done, somewhat.

• "It is likely that this tradition was merely a local legend." ---> "Likely, this tradition was merely a local legend."

• Not done; see above.

• "Tyre was besieged and destroyed in 332 BC, and Gaza experienced a similar fate later the same year. " ---> "Tyre was besieged and destroyed in 332 BC, and Gaza experienced a similar fate later in the same year. "

• Done.

• "Other less well-supported claims include that of: Alexandroschene, Capitolias, Dion, Larisa Sizara, Nikopolis, Paraitonion, Pella, and Seleucia Abila." ----> "Other less well-supported claims include that of Alexandroschene, Capitolias, Dion, Larisa Sizara, Nikopolis, Paraitonion, Pella, and Seleucia Abila."

• Done.

• "In Mesopotamia, Nikephorion (present-day Raqqa), was occasionally attributed to Alexander, but it was more probably founded by Seleucus I." ---> "In Mesopotamia, Nikephorion (present-day Raqqa), was occasionally attributed to Alexander, but Seleucus I more probably founded it."

• Not done; poorer reading.

• "The 19th-century Orientalist H. C. Rawlinson proposed that the Macedonian king founded a settlement shortly after and near to the Battle of Gaugamela, in Assyria. ---> "The 19th-century Orientalist H. C. Rawlinson proposed that the Macedonian king founded a settlement shortly after and near the Battle of Gaugamela in Assyria."

• Done

• "city-names " ---> "city names "

• Done

• "Alexandria on the Tigris have been proposed; but it is likely that some of these names refer to the same city." ---> "Alexandria on the Tigris have been proposed, but some of these names likely refer to the same city."

• Not done; see above.

• "Thus, Alexandria Opiane and Alexandria Kapisa are considered to be names for Alexandria in the Caucasus; Alexandria near Baktra and Alexandria Oxiana may both refer to the same problematic settlement; while in India, the settlements of Taxila and Patala probably existed, but neither was likely founded by Alexander." ---> "Thus, Alexandria Opiane and Alexandria Kapisa are considered to be names for Alexandria in the Caucasus; Alexandria near Baktra and Alexandria Oxiana may both refer to the same problematic settlement; while in India, the settlements of Taxila and Patala probably existed, but Alexander likely founded neither."

• Done

• "Quintus Curtius Rufus wrote that Alexander founded a number of cities in the Indus Delta, but if it means anything he most probably meant some garrisons." ---> "Quintus Curtius Rufus wrote that Alexander founded several cities in the Indus Delta, but if it meant anything, he most probably meant some garrisons."

• Sentence clarified.

• "This list contains settlements established or re-established on the order of Alexander the Great himself, often in his presence and always before his death in 323 BC. " ---> "This list contains settlements established or re-established on the order of Alexander the Great, often in his presence and before his death in 323 BC."

• Not done; unclear whether "often" also applies to the death clause.

• "Discussion of these settlements is found below." ---> "A discussion of these settlements is found below."

• Done

• "Although it is often said that Alexander named all his foundations after himself, this is incorrect; nonetheless, the abundance of these settlements led to many taking on epithets such as Eschate or Oxeiana. " ---> "Although Alexander often named all his foundations after himself, this is incorrect; nonetheless, the abundance of these settlements led to many taking on epithets such as Eschate or Oxeiana. "

• Not done; doesn't make sense.

• "The classicist William Woodthorpe Tarn noted on the matter that "the difficulties of the subject are considerable, the margin of uncertainty often substantial, the sources of confusion numerous"." --_> "On the other hand, the classicist William Woodthorpe Tarn noted that "the difficulties of the subject are considerable, the margin of uncertainty often substantial, the sources of confusion numerous"."

• Not done; it's the same hand, so to speak.

• "The maximum estimate of seventy cities is provided by Plutarch in his Life of Alexander, but most texts attest to between ten and twenty foundations. " ----> "Plutarch provides the maximum estimate of seventy cities in his Life of Alexander, but most texts attest to between ten and twenty foundations. "

• Done.

• "Persian sources such as al-Tabari, al-Dinawari, Hamza al-Isfahani, and Qudama all ascribe between nine and twelve settlements to Alexander." --> "Persian sources such as al-Tabari, al-Dinawari, Hamza al-Isfahani, and Qudama ascribe nine and twelve settlements to Alexander. "

• Done.

• "supplementary evidence. " ---> "additional evidence. "

• Not done; why is this better?

• "Finally, there are the geographers Erastothenes, Ptolemy, and Pliny who draw upon the otherwise-lost evidence of Alexander's bematist distance-measurers" ---> "Finally, the geographers Erastothenes, Ptolemy, and Pliny draw upon the otherwise-lost evidence of Alexander's bematist distance measurers"

• Done.

• "Alexander was groomed for rulership from an early age and acceeded to the throne after the assassination of his father Philip II. " ---> "Alexander was groomed for rulership from an early age and succeeded to the throne after the assassination of his father, Philip II. "

• Not done; why is this better?
  • Both because it has a comma after "father" and because, in my mind, it sounds better... But the comma is important

• Done.

• "After subduing rebellious vassals, he launched an invasion of the Persian Achaemenid Empire in 334 BC. " ---> "After subduing rebellious vassals, he invaded the Persian Achaemenid Empire in 334 BC. "

• Done

• "Alexander swiftly conquered large areas of Western Asia and Egypt, before defeating the Persian king Darius III in battle at Issus and Gaugamela. " ---> "Alexander swiftly conquered large areas of Western Asia and Egypt before defeating the Persian king Darius III in battle at Issus and Gaugamela. "

• Done

• "Achieving complete domination over the former lands of the Achaemenids by 327 BC, Alexander attempted to conquer India, but turned back after his weary troops mutinied. " ---> "Achieving complete domination over the former lands of the Achaemenids by 327 BC, Alexander attempted to conquer India but turned back after his weary troops mutinied. "

• Done

• "Following his death aged thirty-two in Babylon in 323 BC, his empire disintegrated in a series of civil wars fought between his former followers" ---> "Following his death, aged thirty-two in Babylon in 323 BC, his empire disintegrated in a series of civil wars fought between his former followers"

• Not done; "aged ... BC" doesn't work as a sub-clause.

• • You don't need to follow all my suggestions, but if not please explain why—maybe I can learn in the process :)
  • As for the information, the representation of sources — very good work! :)
  • At last, thanks for reviewing my nomination. I really appreciate it!--TheUzbek (talk) 13:23, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you very much for your comments, Uzbek. You can find my responses above. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:11, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks again, TheUzbek. I've executed most of your comments. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:47, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]