Talk:Palmyrene Empire

Unclear Timeline of Events
The time of existence of the Palmyrene Empire makes no sense as this article stands. When were the great battles that the article refers to? And why does the article state it's founding to the death of it's first king, rather than the date of it's final collapse? Please, someone who has those numbers, clean this article up. --Lazarus Plus 17:56, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Incorrect translation of titles?
Quoth the article:

Septimius Odaenathus was assassinated and his son Vaballathus was made king (rex consul imperator dux Romanorum, "illustrious King of Kings" and corrector totius orientis, or "righter of wrongs for the entirety of the East")...

This is confusing because "corrector totius orientis" does mean "righter of wrongs for the entirety of the East" but "rex consul imperator dux Romanorum" doesn't mean "illustrious King of Kings"; it means something like "king, consul, emperor, and general of the Romans." Is "illustrious King of Kings" the translation of another title, maybe one in Palmyrene dialect? --Jfruh (talk) 13:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Empire or Kingdom?
AsharaDayne (talk) 07:14, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Typo needs eliminating
In the notes, there is this: "^ The first decisive for the title is an inscription dated to 271, posthumously describing Odaenathus as king of kings.[11][12] However, Odaenathus inscriptions address him as king, and its not certain that he used the king of kings title.[11]" I can't figure out how to edit it, but the word "its" needs to be changed to "it is" or "it's." Kdammers (talk) 04:30, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
 * This article have many typos, mainly cause I wrote it very fast. I was writing the Palmyra article and I noticed that this article need to be rewritten, so I just pasted some unedited sentences from my sandbox, then I tried to fix them here, but I didn't give much attention cause I was busy with other articles. I will fix this--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 05:08, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

This is a fork
In the last couple of days the article was inflated by text copied from Zenobia with superficial changes. This is against the policy of Content forking and it is specifically a Redundant content fork. It is also a violation of Copying within Wikipedia: no attribution was mentioned (I know this because the text copied here was written by me originally, as well as the text in this article before it was "expanded") If the article is to be expanded then it should be by adding new content based on research not just copying from other articles. I wanted to revert the article to its pre-fork version, as it is against Wiki policy, but I will wait a while for a discussion on how to genuinely improve the article.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 08:51, 31 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Apologies, I was not aware this was in violation of such policies. I attempted to rewrite and distinguish the content, for example focusing more on the culture, government, and society of the empire (as one would with other countries). I am genuinely unsure of how else to improve it that wouldn't seem like a content fork, unless it needs to be rewritten to further distinguish it (for example, the empire's religious tolerance under Zenobia versus how it is described in her article). Do advise and I'll work with you accordingly, given your familiarity with these policies and the subject matter. Cheers! Zurkhardo (talk) 19:19, 3 June 2020 (UTC)