Talk:Areopagus

A Winner of the March 2005 West Dakota Prize

Untitled
This entry is one of only seventeen that have won the March 2005 West Dakota Prize for successfully employing the expression "legend states" in a complete sentence. --Wetman 08:18, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC) - A Winner of the September 2005 West Dakota Prize This entry, one of an unprecedented 52, has won the September 2005 West Dakota Prize, awarded for successfully employing the expression "legend states''" in a complete sentence. -

=Would Someone Like to Expand what it says about Paul?=

The way it's put it almost sounds like Paul's speech only had a sentence or two and it doesn't include the outcome of his speech. Invmog (talk) 23:43, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

From Acts 17:

17:22 So Paul stood before the Areopagus and said, “Men of Athens, I see that you are very religious in all respects. 17:23 For as I went around and observed closely your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: ‘To an unknown god.’ Therefore what you worship without knowing it, this I proclaim to you. 17:24 The God who made the world and everything in it, who is Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by human hands, 17:25 nor is he served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives life and breath and everything to everyone. 17:26 From one man he made every nation of the human race to inhabit the entire earth, determining their set times and the fixed limits of the places where they would live, 17:27 so that they would search for God and perhaps grope around for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. 17:28 For in him we live and move about and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we too are his offspring.’ 17:29 So since we are God’s offspring, we should not think the deity is like gold or silver or stone, an image made by human skill and imagination. 17:30 Therefore, although God has overlooked such times of ignorance, he now commands all people everywhere to repent, 17:31 because he has set a day on which he is going to judge the world in righteousness, by a man whom he designated, having provided proof to everyone by raising him from the dead.”

17:32 Now when they heard about the resurrection from the dead, some began to scoff, but others said, “We will hear you again about this.” 17:33 So Paul left the Areopagus. 17:34 But some people joined him and believed. Among them were Dionysius, who was a member of the Areopagus, a woman named Damaris, and others with them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.155.80.203 (talk) 19:11, 6 May 2010 (UTC)


 * This would make it more about Paul, than the Areopagus. See WP:TOPIC. This place was a forum where a lot of words were said over the years by a lot of people, probably most of them pagan! Looking to give them equal time? :)  Student7 (talk) 17:05, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

@Student7: Is it not understandable to ask for further information about Paul considering the historical impact of his speech at the Aeropagus? Did the others you are referring to have such an important impact historically due to their speeches there? It's not a matter of personal preference, but historical relevancy. Contributor76.94.159.172 (talk) 00:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)


 * No. It has to do with WP:TOPIC relevancy. Entries must be more about Areopagus than Paul. Okay to have link to Paul, but that is pretty much it, having indicated somewhere that Acts placed him there. One line or so. If, and only iff, a reader is interested in Paul, does he need to know about Paul. In my case and for other educated reaaders, they won't take the link because they already know. They came to this article to understand Areopagus, not Paul. To have extraneous information there is not helpful (but this just expands what WP:TOPIC says). Student7 (talk) 11:27, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * The other problem, which is relatively minor, but solved by this arrangement, is that we don't have 2 or 50 places to update when a change is made. It is made in one place only (under Paul, most likely).


 * Again, we can't negotiate policy here, but think about giving equal space to pagans/political figures who spoke at the site. You might be unpleasantly surprised at how eloquent they were! Pauls' commments could be easily lost! If you are saying that Paul was more eloquent than Demothenes, Socrates, Pericles, just to name a few. Paul, BTW, was easily overshadowed as a speaker (but maybe not a writer) by Apollo, right? Anyway...Student7 (talk) 11:27, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Just looked at it and think it says too much already. Listing Psaul's topic maybe okay, but quote seems a bit out of order IMO. Student7 (talk) 11:31, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Areopagus. 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 tag to http://net.bible.org/dictionary.php?word=AREOPAGUS
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101203213131/http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/GREECE/ATHENS.HTM to http://wsu.edu/~dee/GREECE/ATHENS.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) 13:58, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Opening
Opening of the article:

"The Areopagus (/æriˈɒpəɡəs/) is a prominent rock outcropping located northwest of the Acropolis in Athens, Greece. Its English name is the Late Latin composite form of the Greek name Areios Pagos, translated "Hill of Ares" (Ancient Greek: Ἄρειος Πάγος)"

The rest of the article is about the Athenian governing council.

Areopagus has more than one meaning. Much can be said about one of them. The other one is notable but little can be said about it. Wikipedia surely has better ways of dealing with situations like this. Maybe you could make the article about just one topic, and then stub the other topic. It seems like a valid usage of a stub. Comiscuous (talk) 06:01, 3 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I don't know anything about this subject, but generally speaking of an encyclopedia, what you're describing is the opposite of a valid usage of a stub. The only valid usage of a stub, for the existence of any article other than gazetteer functions like mapping, is for something that you know for a fact can become a full article. Generally speaking, a stub that is notable but cannot be expanded would be merged into this article instead of being deleted or turned into a redirect. But if somebody expands this article's other side with WP:RS WP:N then it should be split. — Smuckola(talk) 02:33, 4 April 2022 (UTC)


 * When I said that of one of the senses little could be said, I meant it only in a relative sense. Certainly if it was stubbed someone could expand upon it. Comiscuous (talk)