Draft talk:Return of the Heracleidae

Tense

For the myth, what do you think of rephrasing into present tense, like in Overthrow of the Roman monarchy § Account? It's something I've been doing to make sure that myths don't get read as history; I can do the edits required over the coming days if you agree. Ifly6 (talk) 16:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's generally the rule for fiction, which is considered to exist in a kind of eternal present. Myths are slightly different -- they are narratives which are (or at least were, given that the people who believe them are now almost all dead) held to exist in a specific, real time.

The rule on here is to follow what good-quality printed sources do, and if you look at the sources we cite in the article, they universally use the past tense for mythical material, and the present tense when handling the adaptation of that myth into literature. I've yet to see a style guide that would advise anything different.

I do share the desire not to confuse a mythical account with a historical one, but hopefully putting the material in a section called "Outline of the myth" makes things sufficiently clear without sacrificing grammar. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 20:19, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've no objection to just following what the profession is doing – it's that way with the Roman foundation myths too – but, regardless, I think we should be extra wary of the factual-esque impression it leaves on laypeople. Ifly6 (talk) 01:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]