The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. MBisanz talk 02:34, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Siege of Doriskos[edit]

Siege of Doriskos (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Unsourced sub-stub, no references cited; probably based on original research, as this appears to be one of a number of similar articles which form something of a walled garden of OR-based articles. (See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of the Tigris, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siege of Kapisa and User:ChrisO/Ancient Persian problems for related discussions.) Tagged for cleanup since April 2008 but none has been forthcoming. I've tried to substantiate the topic of the article but have found no information on a "Siege of Doriskos". -- ChrisO (talk) 23:35, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. It is easy to find entries in google books or google scholar which contain both "siege" and "Doriskos". Putting quotes around "Siege of Doriskos", nothing comes up on either search. Mathsci (talk) 07:00, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ariobarza's research method appears to consist of trawling Google Books for snippets to stitch together to create a narrative that you won't find in any reliable source. That's the underlying problem here, basically original research by synthesis - it seems to be the common theme of these AfDs. -- ChrisO (talk) 00:59, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd say that avoiding AfDs has a lot more to do with not trying to paste sources together only when challenged, in favor of writing articles in the first place from solid sources. Every time. Period.  RGTraynor  04:17, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't know where you're getting that from - see Risker's comment above. The source absolutely does not say anything about a siege at Doriskos. That seems to be an original interpretation by Ariobarza. -- ChrisO (talk) 09:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I sometimes find valid sources, BUT it is not my fault that Google does not let me preview it unless I buy the book, so that does not make [my wrong timed creation of a couple of articles, when I was inexperienced] it OR or SYN!--Ariobarza (talk) 09:37, 8 November 2008 (UTC)Ariobarza talk[reply]

(ec x 2) I have now included the account of Herodotus based on secondary sources in the article. It is mentioned in Mitford's History of Greece, where as in Herodotus VII.106 (the only classical source referred to in the literature by scholars like Briant and Kuhrt) it is indicated that Doriscus withstood Greek attacks into the times of Herodotus himself. Interestingly there is a schoolbook of accompanying questions for Mitford's book here by the Reverend John Major of Wisbech Grammar School (no relation!) which has a question on the sieges of Eion and Doriscus.
My suggestion at present is to use the Herodotus account and the host of secondary accounts to write a full article on the location and history of Doriskos/Doriscus during and after the Persian wars. There is ample material (more references are given about the location and function in another reference I added to the article). Finding VII.106 in the Polymnia of Herodotus puts this discussion in a different light. So far the latinized form of Doriscus has been used in ancient history articles like Battle of Thermopylae. BTW when I click on the link for McGregor's book, no text is available, even if I scroll down the page. Please could you give a better link? Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 10:47, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If your on the googlebooks and you first see the book, there is a part under the small text that says add to my library, more editions... click on more editions, and search in those, IF you have not already done this, And Doug, its on page 67 read it all the way through if you have to, it spells it Doriscus, but the most popular and widely accepted spelling is Doriskos, I have already checked this, thank you.--Ariobarza (talk) 11:01, 9 November 2008 (UTC)Ariobarza talk[reply]

On typing "siege of doriscus" into google books, I get the non-viewable book; but the quote "seige of doriscus" does come up in the entry along with a reference to page 67. On typing "Mascames siege Doriscus", I get to see the sentence "There were others; for example, Doriscus on the north Aegaean coast, where for many years the defence was conducted by the courageous Persian Mascames" from page 40 of the book. Mathsci (talk) 11:54, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
McGregor's book cannot be read serially on google books. The other reference to Herodotus VII.62 as the Battle of Doriscus is just a mistake by Daniel Potts. There is no Battle of Doriscus in Herodotus, just a counting and reviewing of the troops on the coastal plains prior to the Battle of Thermopylae. I don't think there is the slightest ambiguity about that in any other authors, some like Pierre Briant, a Professeur at the Collège de France, classicists of the highest standing. Apart from Herodotus' Polymnia (Book VII of his Historia), there seems to be no other account from antiquity of the events at Doriscus, i.e. primary source. The accounts referred to in the article by Briant and Kuhrt are unambiguous, rely on Herodotus as a source, and agree with almost all other modern and nineteenth century commentaries. Arguing otherwise seems to be clutching at straws. Please go and read the History of Herodotus VII and the secondary commentaries on it (a searchable wikisource translation is available at one click in the article). You seem to have made a mistake if you are suggesting that the troops, in excess of one million, amassed at Doriscus fought a battle at Doriscus against the Greeks prior to Thermopylae. Perhaps this is not what you are claiming, but please could you clarify yourself? Mathsci (talk) 00:40, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the wiksource for Πολύμνια in Ancient Greek, if that's easier for you. Mathsci (talk) 01:15, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.