Talk:Cybele

References are inconsistent
I'll refrain from further editing on the article for the foreseeable future, but I do want to point out that a number of citation formats are being used on the page. Standardizing is best per WP:CITEVAR, and it makes it possible for other editors to edit/add material without furthering the mess.

I saw citation templates in use on the page and started standardizing some of the references to that format. (I don't have a strong preference for them; I had not encountered them until I saw them in use in this article. I came to the article out of curiosity, and as I read, I liked the way the cite templates were offering the full cite information while the in-text citations remained concise.) I didn't realize how contentious they were, as pointed out on my talk page. I'm just pointing out that a consensus would help improve the page. Popoki35 (talk) 12:39, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the changes that you have made. I think that the sfn/harvnb tags are an improvement, since they were already present on the page, they make the references shorter, and are machine-readable. I'm not terribly convinced that they are any harder to use than any other wiki-syntax (I actually find it much easier to read a text with sfn/harvnb tags than one with ref tags) and they are now very wide-spread across the wiki. Furius (talk) 23:42, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Why is it controversial?

 * Greek and Roman writers debated and disputed the meaning and morality of her cults and priesthoods, which remain controversial subjects in modern scholarship.

Please explain why it is controversial here. Viriditas (talk) 10:56, 1 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Controversial means the "meaning and morality", in this cases, is not agreed upon. Example: scholar A thinks it means x, scholar B thinks it means y. Controversial is a neutral adjective here. 27.55.89.161 (talk) 10:06, 6 June 2023 (UTC)