Talk:Alexander the Great

Summarize Timeline Top Qs Fact Check

I removed and @PharaohCrab reinstated a section from the infobox showing various Egyptian titles: Horus name (four), plus Nebty name, Golden Horus, Prenomem and Nomen, each presented in several ways including hieroglyphics, e.g.

Second Horus name:

MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE tells us The purpose of an infobox is to summarize, but not supplant, the key facts that appear in an article. Barring the specific exceptions listed below, an article should remain complete with its infobox ignored. The less information that an infobox contains, the more effectively it serves its purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance. The section

PharaohCrab's edit summary on reverting was "this information is infant useful which is why royal titulares are present in the infoboxes of almost every other pharaoh which should include Alexander the Great", which does not explain how the information is "useful", let alone key. I haven't checked if we do this in the infoboxes of "almost every other pharaoh"; even if it does, WP:OTHERCONTENT would apply, and moreover Alexander the Great is not like other pharaohs, and this article is not templated on our articles about pharaohs.

Please could other editors join us in discussing whether to keep or remove that infobox section? NebY (talk) 14:07, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

I will individually address all points.

1. I guess it does not summarize article content but that is a slippery slope that can lead to the removal of much more like the religion parameter or even the image in this article and many other things that most would oppose to being removed in other article.
2. While not the most impotent facts they still can be useful and I personally have on similar pages.
3. I have a source right here .
4. That is the least intrusive way to add this info
5. The colors are meant to align with Infobox pharaoh.
6. That is indeed a problem but I was not aware of it and it should be fixed at the relevant template.

I don't think WP:OTHERCONTENT applies here because it is not just present in one or two articles but basically every pharaohs article because it is directly built into Infobox pharaoh and is also included in the articles for the other members of the Argead dynasty that ruled Egypt (Philip III of Macedon and Alexander IV of Macedon) in the same way it is implemented here so why should this be the sole exception.

If you can find a way to implement this into the body that may be the better option but I do think this info should be included somewhere in the article, perhaps in a similar way the titulary in implemented into the body of Mentuhotep II.

P.S. I'm not sure what you mean by "not templated on our articles about pharaohs". PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 15:19, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

1. Compliance with policies and guidelines isn't a slippery slope; it's foundational! The slippery slope is arguing that as we allow one element, such as a brief mention of religion, then we must allow anything, however great, however obtrusive. But there is no requirement that we can only use images that appear in the body of the article and no-one's suggesting it.
2. In what sense are the eight royal titularies, each expressed in two transcriptions, one translation and hieroglyphics, useful or important? I don't understand "I personally have on similar pages".
3. Pharoh.se is not a WP:RS.
4. It isn't the least obtrusive way to add that content; a collapsed table in the body of the article would be less obtrusive than an entry in the infobox, even if that infobox entry wasn't highlighted.
5. Using the colouring of {{tl:Infobox pharaoh}} is discordant; this infobox does not use that pallette. Very few readers would look at that colouring and think "Aha, that's the same colouring Wikipedia uses for boxes about pharaohs! This must be something Egyptian."
6. It's a problem with the code you've used; fixing the other infobox won't affect this one.

This is not the sole exception; we don't have such entries in any of the infoboxes of Alexander's predecessors as rulers of Egypt, nor should we - that would be the tail wagging the dog.

I should have said that this article is not patterned on our articles about pharaohs. Sorry that wasn't clear, I'd been thinking too much about templates. NebY (talk) 19:58, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

@PharaohCrab Are you now able to accept my removal of the Egyptian royal titularies from the infobox? If not, we could seek WP:3O or go to WP:DRN, or we could seek editors who already work in appropriate fields by placing a neutral invitation to join the discussion at relevant wikiprojects, e.g. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ancient Egypt, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes. NebY (talk) 19:56, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Sure,I still disagree but I'm not going to fight you about it PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 20:12, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

OK, I'll go ahead with removal. Thank you. NebY (talk) 19:17, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Summary spreadsheet references Palestine both historically and currently. Neither are correct. In both cases the correct geographical location is Israel. Both ancient and modern day. The term Palestine wasn't used for this region until many centuries after Alexander's time. Please correct. Gkorol (talk) 18:25, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Παλαιστίνη (Palestine) is the term that Herodotus used several times in the earliest surviving work of Greek prose, written before Alexander was born.(1.105, 2.104, 2.106, 3.5.1, 3.91, 4.39.2, 7.89.1, 7.89.2) NebY (talk) 19:12, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

"written before Alexander was born" Yes, since died in the 420s BC, about 70 years before Alexander's birth. Palestine appears in Greek text for the last 26 centuries. The neologism Judea starts appearing around the 1st century AD, per the Timeline of the name Judea. Dimadick (talk) 04:05, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

The second paragraph claims that Alexander "was tutored by philosopher and polymath Aristotle until the age of 16". I think this overstates the matter as it implies that Aristotle taught Alexander since childhood until he was 16, when in reality Aristotle likely one tutored Alexander for a few years when he was a teenager. This is discussed later in the article under 'Education', but I feel that the initial introduction may be misleading to those who just skim it.

Sources, if need, could include Worthington, 'By the Spear' p.27 and Bosworth 'Conquest and Empire' pp.20-21, who say the tutoring lasted from when Alexander was 14-16, which is also implied by Plut. Alex. 7.2. Lastdiadochos (talk) 13:59, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Apologies for posting back to back, but having read through the education section, I have a handful of quibbles.

- A citation is needed to support the claim that Speusippus offered to resign as head of the Academy to tutor Alexander. In the letter to Philip attributed to Speusippus, it is clear that he recommends his protege Antipater for the position (see also Markle 'Support of Athenian Intellectuals for Philip: A Study of Isocrates' Philippus and Speusippus' Letter to Philip' p.94)

- Describing the Mieza as a "boarding school" seems anachronistic and speculative. At the very least, a source for that should be provided. I tried to find the root of the claim, and found Mieza first described as such in a facebook post from 2010. At the very least, I think this claim needs a source.

- The following paragraph implies that Ptolemy, Hephaestion and Cassander were educated at the Mieza with Alexander by Aristotle. Ptolemy was significantly older than Alexander though, near 20 years old when Alexander's tutelage under Aristotle began, so it is highly unlikely that Ptolemy was in these lessons. (Heckel's 'The BOyhood Friends of Alexander' is useful here). Hephaestion and Cassander can stay, though it may be better to make it less declarative, e.g. "and the children of Macedonian nobles, perhaps including the likes of Hephaestion, and Cassander."

- "Many of these students would become his friends and future generals, and are often known as the "Companions". Implies that it was only Alexander's friends and generals who called the Companions. However, while Anaximenes claims that AN Alexander formed the Companions, this may refer to Alexander I, II or III (See Anson, Eumenes of Cardia, pp. 227–9.). It is even not unusual for scholars to refer to the Macedonian aristocratic class in general as the king's Companions (e.g. Hammond, History of Macedonia 2, 158-160. Lastdiadochos (talk) 14:41, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change "closest friend" to "partner" ~2026-26065-79 (talk) 21:09, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

 Not done –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 23:07, 28 April 2026 (UTC)