Talk:Location hypotheses of Atlantis

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Location hypotheses of Atlantis. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101011052807/http://sprint.clivar.org/soes/staff/ejr/Rohling-papers/2008-Weninger%20et%20al%20Documenta%20Praehistorica.pdf to http://sprint.clivar.org/soes/staff/ejr/Rohling-papers/2008-Weninger%20et%20al%20Documenta%20Praehistorica.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:20, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Location hypotheses of Atlantis. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719060755/http://www.marum.de/Binaries/Binary_35758/Huebscher_2009_Tectono.pdf to http://www.marum.de/Binaries/Binary_35758/Huebscher_2009_Tectono.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.atlantipedia.com/index.php?Itemid=53&option=com_jfusion&do=show&id=malta
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061005154349/http://bocksaga.com/links.html to http://www.bocksaga.com/links.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081227205521/http://www.lauralee.com/rflemath/default.htm to http://www.lauralee.com/rflemath/default.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:39, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Location hypotheses of Atlantis. 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://www.mysterious-america.net/atlantisinsider.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150710161025/http://isbndb.com/d/book/atlantis_tartessos_aegyptius_codex_clavis_epitome_de_la_atla.html to http://isbndb.com/d/book/atlantis_tartessos_aegyptius_codex_clavis_epitome_de_la_atla.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:50, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Misleading Text About not Notable Claim that the Richat Dome is Atlantis
I removed text for two reasons. First, the text promotes a youTube Bright Insight video that simply rehashes the ideas of a pre-existing documentary and offers nothing in the way of original material. The original authors of this idea is George S. Alexander and Natalis Rosen, Visiting Atlantis, instead of what the removed text incorrectly indicates the Bright Sight youtube video to be. Finally, both videos lack notability. They are both primary sources that lack significant reliable primary sources. The only mention of this idea in secondary sources are articles rehashing of the content of the video without any critical review in tabloids such as the The Daily Express, The Daily Mirror, and The Daily Star. This idea by George S. Alexander and Natalis Rosen, and rehashed by the Bright Insight video, lacks the notability and sources needed for inclusion a Wikipedia article. Paul H. (talk) 15:18, 27 September 2018 (UTC)


 * One item that needs to mentioned is that YouTube Bright Insight video simply rehashes the ideas of a pre-existing documentary and offers nothing in the way of original material. The original authors of this idea is George S. Alexander and Natalis Rosen, Visiting Atlantis, instead of what the removed text incorrectly indicates the Bright Sight youtube video to be. Furthermore, in 2016, this same claim was briefly mentioned without any real analysis in the book:


 * Mark Adams (26 April 2016). Meet Me in Atlantis: Across Three Continents in Search of the Legendary Sunken City. Penguin Publishing Group. p. 203. ISBN 978-1-101-98393-5.


 * Therefore, the idea that the Richat Structure being Atlantis is not an original invention of either George S. Alexander or the YouTube Bright Insight video. Also, Mark Adams and the Richat Structure is already mentioned in this article.


 * By the way, a similar discussion is happening in Talk:Richat Structure. Paul H. (talk)

It is in fact incredibly notable. You might not agree with it but it doesn't give you the right to hide it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.179.159.63 (talk) 01:09, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 * If it is incredibility notable it would have received in depth coverage enough for a stand alone article. At best (as far as I can tell) this is a fringe theory that no reputable scholar supports (or even the bulk of Atlantis proponents). This seems to be a Fringe theory even in Atlantology.Slatersteven (talk) 08:51, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Bright's just another conspiracy theorist, see his Twitter feed. Note that he also has a Patreon page and seems to be doing pretty well by spouting this guff. I've given the IP a 3RR notice and if he/she reinserts their edit they can be reported immediately. Doug Weller  talk 15:00, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Why does this article exist?
Nothing in here could be said to be encyclopaedic. At most this merits a section in the Atlantis article. 79.79.254.66 (talk) 19:58, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * That would make for a very long article. Better we have this here.-- Auric   talk  20:00, 13 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Because the modern search for Atlantis is often more interesting than the ancient sources on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:4C8:141E:BF4E:1:2:CF55:966A (talk) 21:21, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Isles of Scilly
I think the Isles of Scilly deserve a specific mention, aside from the island of Great Britain:


 * They have suffered substantial inundation within the historic period, and declined greatly in size.
 * It seems that they were in contact with the Classical Mediterranean through the Phoenecian tin trade much earlier than many parts of northern Europe.
 * The area has ancient legends connected with lost cities etc (Lyonesse).
 * For Mediterreanean traders going by sea, travel would have been via the Straits of Gibraltar.

The legend could well be an exaggeration of local conditions.

No, this is not "original research", various people have suggested it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:4C8:141E:BF4E:1:2:CF55:966A (talk) 21:31, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

TWO POSSIBLE SOURCES OF INSPIRATION TO THE ATLANTIS-MYTH. One possible source of inspiration to Atlantis may be what has been called "The first Utopia in western litterature": The island-realm of Phaecia that Odysseus visits in the Odyssey. Conversely some Atlantis- believers have dubbed the land of the phaecians "Atlantis" appaerently taking the Odyssey for history. Note that Phaecia gets on the wrong side of Poseidon and suffers misfortune, perhaps disaster, due to their aid to Odysseus. Then the reason why Plato lets it be egyptian priests that "reveals" ATlantis to visistor Solon may be that there are ancient egyptian legends about Egypt having been founded by "red-haired" strangers from the west. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.130.31.203 (talk) 10:13, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

TWO POSSIBLE SOURCES OF INSPIRATION TO THE ATLANTIS-MYTH. One possible source of inspiration to Atlantis may be what has been called "The first Utopia in western litterature": The island-realm of Phaecia that Odysseus visits in the Odyssey. Conversely some Atlantis- believers have dubbed the land of the phaecians "Atlantis" appaerently taking the Odyssey for history. Note that Phaecia gets on the wrong side of Poseidon and suffers misfortune, perhaps disaster, due to their aid to Odysseus. Then the reason why Plato lets it be egyptian priests that "reveals" ATlantis to visistor Solon may be that there are ancient egyptian legends about Egypt having been founded by "red-haired" strangers from the west. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.130.31.203 (talk) 10:15, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Got any RS to support this?Slatersteven (talk) 10:16, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

- TWO POSSIBLE SOURCES OF INSPIRATION TO THE ATLANTIS-MYTH. One possible source of inspiration to Atlantis may be what has been called "The first Utopia in western litterature": The island-realm of Phaecia that Odysseus visits in the Odyssey. Conversely some Atlantis- believers have dubbed the land of the phaecians "Atlantis" appaerently taking the Odyssey for history. Note that Phaecia gets on the wrong side of Poseidon and suffers misfortune, perhaps disaster, due to their aid to Odysseus. Then the reason why Plato lets it be egyptian priests that "reveals" ATlantis to visistor Solon may be that there are ancient egyptian legends about Egypt having been founded by "red-haired" strangers from the west. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.130.31.203 (talk) 10:19, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, you have said this above, we do not need to see it again.Slatersteven (talk) 10:21, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

The Land of Punt
Though it is not generally broached in mainstream discussions about Atlantis, I find it odd that the only "mythical place" that Egyptians (the purported authors of the Atlantis tale) describe with both the same reverence and almost all the same flora and fauna as the Atlantis tale is "The Land of Punt". If some nod to this cannot be included in the article, could we at least link the "Land of Punt" article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.84.66.30 (talk) 08:33, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * You yourself have said it "Though it is not generally broached in mainstream discussions about Atlantis", wp:fringe means we cannot have every theory that has been propagated on "mythoryaboutatlantis.com" type websites. Not can we link to Land of Punt as the article makes no mention of Atlantis.Slatersteven (talk) 08:37, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Did you read https://www.atlantisfound.it/2021/01/21/atlantis-has-been-found-by-dr-luigi-usai/ ? could you please analize it and see if it's relevant? Thank you in advance, then delete this post. Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.170.248.145 (talk) 22:48, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Hübner links. National Geographic documentary.
I just saw the National Geographic documentary on Atlantis which zoomed in on the Azores, then Morocco, and finally Mauritania. Checking names of people I found that the Hübner links no longer worked. I think the referenced documents are still available on the web. Then I went to the Wikipedia article on the Richat structure in Mauritania. The documentary showed an archaeologist who uses satellite photos and discovered a big rectangular structure in the ring. But there is no mention of her finding in the article. Richard Gill (talk) 19:47, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * What was her name?Slatersteven (talk) 11:25, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * There are scattered structures within the Richat structure that look like caravanserai. They were buildings designed to provide overnight housing to travelers. These structures recognizable by the small turrets on the corners which are a characteristic of Islamic architecture and their central court. Likely related to the 15th century or earlier Mali empire that had flourishing trade networks in the region. (Note: this is original research and, thus, I cannot add it to this article. Looking for an official source.) Paul H. (talk) 20:25, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Undoing of revisions seen as vandalism
Slatersteven Undoing of revisions seen as vandalism: please I ask the Wikipedia Community to check what he is doing.

14:28, 22 August 2021‎ Slatersteven talk contribs‎ 84,870 bytes −3,980‎  Undid revision 1040074660 by 5.170.129.135 (talk)I think you need to rethink some of those sources undo Tags: Undo Reverted — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.170.129.135 (talk • contribs) 14:43, August 22, 2021 (UTC)


 * A number of your sources would not pass wp:rs such as Il ruolo centrale della superpotenza navale neolitica Sardo Corsa nel Mediterraneo (maybe self published) and http://atlantisonline.smfforfree2.com/index.php?topic=38017.0 (A blog). If you think my reverts were vandalism take it here wp:aiv, I would advise against it.Slatersteven (talk) 14:49, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Are you trying to tell me that if Einstein self-published the Theory of Relativity you wouldn't accept it because it's self published? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.170.129.135 (talk • contribs) 15:32, August 22, 2021 (UTC)
 * No, policy would be, if he was not a widely regarded expert.Slatersteven (talk) 15:38, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind answer. May I ask you if you did check if the text contains facts or lies? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.170.129.135 (talk • contribs) 15:42, August 22, 2021 (UTC)
 * That is irrelevant, we go what wp:rs say. But some might argue that any source that talks about Atlantis as anything other than a purely intellectual exercise by Plato are inhearantly unfactual.Slatersteven (talk) 15:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Your statements are correct in relation to the page on Atlantis. But this page is called Hypothesis on the location of Atlantis, and the one exposed is one of the hundreds of hypotheses, which you have decided to reject. The incredible thing is that you are rejecting the only hypothesis that shows toponymic, archaeological, links to Poseidon's tridents even preserved in a museum. It therefore seems that you have a personal interest in removing this particular theory, as if you do not want it to be analyzed and known by wik:::::::::::::ipedia readers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.170.129.135 (talk • contribs) 16:17, August 22, 2021 (UTC)
 * It's called policy (see wp:fringe wp:undue) its is his view that his views are significant when RS think they are we can. It really is that simple, we cannot have every fringe view for Atlantisies location.Slatersteven (talk) 16:20, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it is now time for others to chip in (ohh and read wp:consensus and wp:brd).Slatersteven (talk) 16:21, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Slatersteven is right. While you are reading policies and guidelines, you should also have a look at WP:NOT. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising unpublished or non-notable ideas. --Hob Gadling (talk) 18:23, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

All over the world there are thousands of publishing houses that publish the texts under their name, in exchange for a few hundred dollars and the purchase of a few copies. So you are stating that to appear on wikipedia it is enough to pay any publisher that you do not know, in this way you see that the text is published by a publisher and not self-published, and you validate the text. But not this, of course, because by now you have already made some decisions. Even the Nazi soldiers were like that: they followed the rules to the letter, without using their brains. They never considered themselves guilty of the extermination of the Jews. Similarly on wikipedia you follow the rules, but without thinking about what really happens. You have deleted the inserted text without even reading it and checking if the things stated are true or false, because some of your editors are not interested in truth and objective facts, but in the stupid execution of rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.170.129.135 (talk • contribs) 22:58, August 22, 2021 (UTC)

Suppose one theory found only one proof of the existence of Atlantis, while another theory found 47 proofs of the existence of Atlantis. Now, if on Wikipedia one theory shows only one point and the other shows 47 points, it doesn't mean that the second theory is presented as more important: it just means that it has found more evidence than other theories. But you have deleted it, removing the possibility for the reader population to know this new theory and to analyze whether the affirmed points are true or false, correct or incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.170.129.135 (talk • contribs) 23:12, August 22, 2021 (UTC)


 * Ah, WP:GODWIN already. Please sign your talk page posts.
 * No, Slatersteven and Hob Gadling are not saying that paying a publishing company to publish something makes it a reliable source. That's a Vanity press publication and is generally not of any use as a reliable source. Neither are other forms of WP:RSSELF such as blogs. Please read WP:RS.
 * And I don't think this should go in either. Meters (talk) 23:22, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Toponymy is a RS?
Toponymy is a RS for Wikipedians?
 * We are not using it as a source. But I have now attrubuted one SPS's views.Slatersteven (talk) 16:36, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Could you please translate SPS's views? Thank you in advance.
 * wp:sps Self published source, which I doubt is an RS anyway.Slatersteven (talk) 16:43, 30 August 2021 (UTC)