Talk:Knidos

= Comments =

Name
The name has been changed to Cnidus recently, probably by someone who studies Roman history. But it should be Knidos as before because;

1. It's much more of an ancient Greek city than a Roman city. It had centuries of history before the Romans came. 2. I didn't check the unique hits but Cnidus gives 80,000 odd hits, while Knidos gave 173,000 hits. Cretanforever 20:07, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't feel strongly about this, but here are some thoughts. Point (1) and (3) aren't really relevant according to WP standards; what matters is the common name in English. WP uses Naples, not Napoli or Neapolis (it had centuries of history before the Romans came...), etc. Point (2) is more relevant, but google.com is subject to a variety of distortions; for example, tourist information is overrepresented compared to scholarly information, so it's interesting to compare with scholar.google.com and books.google.com. There, the two spellings are actually pretty close in popularity, but eyeballing the results, it looks as though Knidos is more prevalent in more recent publications. Since the spellings are about equally prevalent in the scholarly and book literature, then we can look at the other arguments, so I agree with you in the end that Knidos is a more appropriate title. --Macrakis 21:41, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

The more so since the name change from Knidos into Cnidus was made on 12 October under the argument that "the correct name of the city is Cnidus not Knidos". Knidos is the last thing that would be a wrong name for the site, in fact neither Knidos nor Cnidus are wrong. And since Knidos is in addition generally becoming more prevalent, I say we should opt for it. Cretanforever 22:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * A knowledgable mention should be made on the discussions surrounding a possible move of the city from an earlier location to the tip of the peninsula. Pembeana (talk) 10:52, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://blog.turkeytravelinfo.net/2008/12/30/knidos-datca-turkey/
 * Triggered by  on the global blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 15:40, 8 December 2013 (UTC)