Talk:Cleopatra/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions about Cleopatra. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Spoken Article

Hi there, I'm looking at making a Spoken version of the Cleopatra article. I just wanted to check and see if anyone already has something in progress? It's a long article so I don't want to duplicate efforts. Cheers, Theayeaye (talk) 03:12, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

@Theayeaye: I've never heard anyone suggest this here and I've been closely monitoring the talk page since at least the beginning of 2018 (when I started working on lifting the article to Featured status). Perhaps you should wait a few days, but if no one chimes in, I think it would be great for you to pursue making a spoken audio version of the article. I would thoroughly enjoy hearing it! All the best, Pericles of Athens^Talk 05:07, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

@Theayeaye: Hello again. Are you still interested in doing a spoken article version of Cleopatra? Pericles of Athens^Talk 23:07, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

@PericlesofAthens: Hiya, I started the recording back in October/November but my schedule has gotten a lot busier lately so I put it on hold. I'm hoping to pick it up again in the Spring. --Theayeaye (talk) 03:01, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

@Theayeaye: hello once again! We're moving past the middle of the summer now, and I was wondering if you were still interested in doing a spoken article? The lead section has been changed a little bit since we last spoke, but not significantly. The rest of the article has been basically static, so you could probably just pick up where you left off! Please consider it and thanks for the effort. Regards, Pericles of Athens^Talk 22:47, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

@PericlesofAthens: Thanks for the reminder, I have some time to pick this up again and will work on it over the next couple of weeks. It's a long article so I will do it in a few parts. Cheers --Theayeaye (talk) 21:41, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

@Theayeaye: Thanks! That sounds marvelous. I can't wait to hear it. The Wiki community and indeed its entire reading audience will be indebted to your contributions. Kind regards, Pericles of Athens^Talk 21:48, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

No such thing as oratorix or skill or calm or attracx or not, say/can say any nmw and any be perfx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jiowkdl (talk • contribs) 20:47, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Languages she spoke

This is about the following sentence

She also spoke Ethiopian, Trogodyte, Hebrew (or Aramaic), Arabic, the Syrian language (perhaps Syriac), Median, Parthian, and Latin, although her Roman contemporaries would have preferred to speak with her in her native Koine Greek.[21][19][22][note 12]

See also the "Ethiopian - Ethio-Semitic or Sudanese" section (archive 4 of this talk page). I think the same applies to Arabian/Arabic: 'Arabians' probably refers to the inhabitants of the Sinai, which would later become the Roman province of Arabia Petraea. They certainly did not speak the language we call 'Arabic' today (nor one of its ancestors). I don't have access to the cited sources but it seems they refer to the list by Plutarch, which might not be a reliable source. I got this from https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/d47u90/how_did_cleopatra_speak_arabic_if_the_language/. Sawtoothcoriander (talk) 02:06, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Even if it referred to the inhabitants of the Sinai, it's not improbable that they spoke a language at least closely related to Classical Arabic; see Old Arabic for details. A direct ancestor of Classical Arabic which uses the characteristic article al- is likely attested in the 1st century BC inscription from Qaryat al-Faw, and the article is (somewhat indirectly, through a mention of Al-Lat as Alilát) even attested in Herodotus. But thanks for the Reddit link as it provides a direct quotation from Plutarch. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:22, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

@Florian Blaschke: Yes, it's not like the people of the Nabataean Kingdom were the only literate Arabic speaking peoples at the time considering the kingdom of the Sabaeans. For that matter the Ancient South Arabian script was used as a model for others in East Africa as far back as the 5th century BC, the kingdom of D'mt, before the development of Ge'ez in Ethiopia's Kingdom of Aksum by the 1st century AD. Pericles of Athens^Talk 23:32, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

@PericlesofAthens: Good point – it's entirely possible that the "Arabians" mentioned by Plutarch were people from South Arabia, instead. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 01:29, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm more interested in where the conclusion comes from that she spoke Latin, since the Reddit comment indicates otherwise. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:25, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

@Florian Blaschke: Hello! I'm the one who wrote the majority of the article and nominated it for FA status, relying largely on Duane W. Roller's Cleopatra: a biography (2010) as a model. The claim about Latin actually comes from Roller (pp. 46–48), who I can quote for you here: "In addition to her native Greek, she also knew Latin, although the Romans with whom she came into contact would insist on speaking Greek. Greek had been used officially by the Romans since the early 3rd century B.C., and in Cleopatra's day Cicero complained that there were still people who demanded interpreters, showing that this was neither normal nor expected. Latin would have been useful to her not so much to speak to Romans but to read material in that language, such as the transcript of the trial of her father's banker Rabirius Postumus and senatorial actions relating to her kingdom. In addition, the Romans used Latin more than might be expected in the Levantine territories Cleopatra desired, because of a long-standing antipathy to Greek in this region and at least one of her decrees, directed to a Jewish community, probably to Leontopolis, used some Latin." ---- So there you have it, with proof that Cleopatra used Latin in one of her own decrees. Roller's argument about senatorial litigation makes sense as well, especially considering that Cleopatra lived in Roman Italy for years of her youth, first as a child exile with her father during the short-lived reign of his rival daughter Berenice IV, and later as an adult lover of Julius Caesar in his villa located just outside of Rome. When Caesar was assassinated she was even in the city attempting to form a legal basis for their son Caesarion to become the lawful heir of Julius Caesar and the true inheritor of his will, a document that was undoubtedly written in Latin. Pericles of Athens^Talk 23:32, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

@PericlesofAthens: While it wouldn't be surprising if a polyglot like Cleopatra apparently was also knew Latin, I do wonder where Roller takes this conclusion from with so much confidence. Occasional texts authored by Cleopatra wholly or partly in Latin can have been produced with the help of assistants, so they do not constitute sufficient proof on their own. There are a lot of things claimed as "undoubtedly" true where I just don't see the evidential basis for this judgment. Even if the document in question was written in Latin – so what? Again, she would have had assistants available if needed. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 01:29, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@Florian Blaschke: that's certainly a legitimate argument, but Roller (a credentialed classicist) is a reliable source published by a university press. He's certainly not a fringe author on this subject, so I don't think it warrants removing the mention of Latin here. If you can find a source to contradict him directly, please feel free to create a footnote with an academic source providing a counterpoint or explaining how Cleopatra knowing how to read and write in Latin might be a dubious argument. Roller is obviously not the only authority on the subject, so other voices in academia are obviously always welcome, especially if they challenge his assertions directly and demonstrate that there isn't a full scholarly consensus on any given issue involving Cleopatra and her reign. Pericles of Athens^Talk 13:22, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@PericlesofAthens: As a linguist, I'm not conversant with the literature on Cleopatra – just pointing out that the evidence you're advancing as proof, and Roller is accepting as proof, isn't all that strong. It's certainly striking that the Plutarch quotation (not necessarily compelling proof, either – I've now amended the article so that it doesn't simply state the languages attributed to Cleopatra as fact) doesn't mention the Romans in his list, and it was the dissenting Reddit comment that called my attention upon this detail. But since I don't have any academic support, I won't change the article on that point; I just wondered about Roller's confidence and thought you might know more. After all, there might be additional, confirming evidence that I'm not aware of. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:09, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 February 2020

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

Change the birth dates. There one that says 21 years old when she died. Also change the death date. It's August 10, not 12. Emclendon9983 (talk) 16:04, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

21 years is for how long she reigned. Since there is uncertainty about her birth date, both are mentioned and further explained in a note. – Thjarkur (talk) 17:43, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

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

RE: @Thjarkur: I read from a book called How They Croaked by Georgia Bragg^[1] . It's recent(published in 2019), and reliable(people on Wikipedia "always" mess with everything). I hope this answers your questions. Emclendon9983 (talk) 20:29, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

References

^ Bragg, Georgia. “How They Croaked by Georgia Bragg.” Goodreads, Amazon, LLC., Aug. 2019, www.goodreads.com/book/show/9111463-how-they-croaked.

Did you see the note I pointed to? It explains the matter in detail and points to scholarly sources. How They Croaked is a popular history book, but here it is best to use scholarly sources. – Thjarkur (talk) 21:26, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

@Emclendon9983: Cleopatra was not 21 when she died in 30 BC, that's hilarious. By that ridiculous logic, she would have only been three years old when she met Julius Caesar and had an affair with him in 48 BC and then would have given birth to his child Caesarion when she was only four years old in 47 BC. You are either misreading or totally misrepresenting your rather pedestrian popular history by Georgia Bragg or she made a seriously bad typo that you are now parading around in contradiction to the entire corpus of academic literature regarding Cleopatra. Either way, the dates for Cleopatra's birth and death are fully explained in the article footnote referred to you by User:Þjarkur, with a discussion about the contention within academia and why there isn't a full scholarly consensus for either the 10 or 12 of August in 30 BC. --Pericles of Athens^Talk 21:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Occupation

Over a year ago the sentence "She was also a diplomat, naval commander, linguist, and medical author" was removed from the 1st paragraph of the lead and placed in a footnote, apparently over concerns that the section was too large. A single sentence, however, will hardly have a significant impact on space (especially since this one did not take up additional lines), and this one in particular is of importance in introducing and defining the subject of the article. It could well be restored to the main text. If space is still a concern, then the fragment "nominally survived as pharaoh by her son Caesarion" (which lacks importance here) could be moved to the footnote explaining his pseudo-reign.

The 1st paragraph would be as follows:

Cleopatra VII Philopator (69 – 10 or 12 August 30 BC) was the last active ruler of the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt. (footnote explaining Caesarion's pseudo-reign) She was also a diplomat, naval commander, linguist, and medical author. As a member of the Ptolemaic dynasty...

Avis11 (talk) 20:01, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

That sounds very sensible. I remember when the sentence was in the lead and it looked like a very good definition. Surtsicna (talk) 20:09, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

I have reservations regarding (a) "medical author": the article tells that this is doubted (b) "linguist": the article doesn't tell (c) "naval commander": it is only said that she commanded the rear-guard at Actium, this arguably could be enough to receive this status, but I think it's quite a lot to mention this in the first paragraph of the lede, as if it was one of her main activities (d) "diplomat": every head of state does diplomacy, but a diplomat is a representative obeying orders, it cannot be a king, or a queen in this case. I haven't re-read everything so I may have missed something though.

I suppose this sentence was moved to footnote because it was a bit overblown, but now I support its removal. T8612 (talk) 21:00, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

@T8612: hello once again! This is precisely why I had it moved to a footnote. To its defense, these claims appear prominently at the very beginning of the 2010 Oxford University Press biography on Cleopatra by Duane W. Roller, obviously a reliable source. However, I had it moved to a footnote because of the rather excessive emphasis on these attributes when they were minor aspects of her reign and personal life. She only commanded one other naval fleet aside from her ships at Actium in conjunction with those of Antony. Her using diplomacy is also what one would expect from any variety of heads of state in antiquity. Scholars still debate the veracity of her medical works being rightfully attributed to her, but this is explained in its appropriate place in the body of the article. Her being a linguist is perhaps the most worthwhile or unquestionable item in this list, but this is mentioned in the body sufficiently and the lead paragraph already mentions how she learned the Egyptian language after her native Koine Greek. I wouldn't remove the footnote, I still find it valuable, but I wouldn't put it back in the lead text of the article either. Pericles of Athens^Talk 00:06, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

If Cleopatra had written about language as a sideline to being a monarch—like Claudius, who wrote a now-lost dictionary of Etruscan—I'd support describing her as a linguist, but simply being a polyglot does not make her a linguist. A. Parrot (talk) 01:06, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

What about the part on Caesarion? The first sentence says she was the last active ruler of Ptolemaic Egypt, and proceeds to make mention of a supposed nominal reign of her son, itself elaborated on a subsequent footnote. The fragment "nominally survived as pharaoh by her son Caesarion" can hardly be considered important information on Cleopatra herself, and should, I believe, be moved to the footnote, where the rest of the explanation is. I'm not sure if there is a specific rule for footnotes in the lead section, but the section itself is already cluttered with them. Perhaps the part on her being a linguist, author etc. could be moved to the last paragraph with the status of an additional curiosity? Avis11 (talk) 01:12, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Responding to T8612's point above, per WP:CreateLead (an explanatory supplement but not policy), the primary purpose of a Wikipedia lead is to summarize an article's contents. Therefore, if it's not in the body of the article, it shouldn't be in the lead. If the article doesn't support the characterization as a medical author or linguist, and only minimally supports the characterization as a naval commander and diplomat, then I question whether it would be appropriate to restore these characterizations to the main text of the lead. At this point, I have no opinion about the lead's treatment of Caesarion. – Kekki1978 talk 16:43, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Kekki1978. A. Parrot (talk) 05:26, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Question Re. Narrative Flow in the Lead

I have a question that arises out of an effort to make a few minor tweaks to improve the narrative flow in the lead. I'm not understanding the communicative intent of this sentence (quoted as of 18 April 2020): "After losing the 48 BC Battle of Pharsalus in Greece against his rival Julius Caesar (a Roman dictator and consul) in Caesar's Civil War, the Roman statesman Pompey fled to Egypt, where Ptolemy had him killed while Caesar occupied Alexandria." It is preceded and followed by statements involving Cleopatra, but it is unclear to me what this sentence communicates about Cleopatra. Is its purpose to illustrate what brought Caesar to Egypt? What brought Pompey to Egypt? Both? Something else? Other than the facts, what it conveys about Cleopatra is unclear. Thanks for any elaboration anyone can provide. – Kekki1978 talk 03:06, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

@Kekki1978: Hello! This is a consequence of too many cooks spoiling the broth, so to speak, by attempting to shorten the lead section to what they perceive as the optimal size. In doing so, however, they have excised too many critical and contextual details that are useful to the reader, in my opinion. Pompey fled to Egypt because he had no other recourse after losing the Battle of Pharsalus. Pompey had previously met Ptolemy XII Auletes in Rome during the latter's exile and didn't just know him personally, he was the chief architect of restoring him to the throne in Egypt. Pompey was the one who had Aulus Gabinius, the Roman governor of Syria, raise an army for ousting Ptolemy's rival daughter Berenice IV from power in Egypt. By the time Ptolemy lost the Battle of Pharsalus Ptolemy XII Auletes was dead, but his son Ptolemy XIII was sitting on the throne and engaging in his own civil war with his sister Cleopatra VII. Pompey trusted the Ptolemies as close confidants and political allies, so he chose Egypt as a logical place to flee and had no idea that young Ptolemy XIII (or rather his court eunuchs) would ever dream of having him executed in a scheme to appease his rival Julius Caesar. The calculated move to assassinate Pompey backfired for Ptolemy XIII, of course, when hostilities broke out between his faction and Caesar's Roman army stationed in Alexandria. If it wasn't for Pompey, Caesar most likely would not have come to Egypt in the first place to act as a mediator resolving the conflict between Ptolemy XIII and Cleopatra, or perhaps Caesar would have arrived sometime much later in his career due to Egypt's importance as a source of vital grain shipments to Rome. Whatever the case, Pompey was the catalyst for Caesar meeting Cleopatra and then securing her on the throne with the death of Ptolemy XIII in the 47 BC Battle of the Nile. While all of this cannot be explained in the lead, I will try to do so succinctly with a single sentence simply noting that Pompey was a political ally to the Ptolemies, hence the reason for fleeing to Egypt. Pericles of Athens^Talk 04:03, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

@PericlesofAthens: Hi! Great job with cultivating the article! So, the purpose of that paragraph is to illustrate how Cleopatra ascended the throne, and the purpose of that sentence (now sentences) in particular is to show how Caesar came to Egypt? Thanks. – Kekki1978 talk 14:06, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

@Kekki1978: yes, that is correct. Caesar came to Egypt not yet knowing that Pompey had been killed and was still pursuing him and trying to capture him as a prisoner of war following the Battle of Pharsalus. It might be true or not, but Caesar was said to have wept when he learned that Pompey died, on account of his previous personal friendship and (now broken) marriage alliance with him, and wanted the propaganda victory of a benevolent leader showing clemency to his bested foes. Caesar was undoubtedly shocked when he learned Ptolemy XIII (and his advisers) had Pompey - a former Roman consul - killed for the sole purpose of appeasing Caesar and currying favor with him. It was all around a terrible move when it would have been better to capture Pompey and hand him over to Caesar, especially considering how Caesar and Ptolemy XIII came into conflict with each other soon afterwards. Pericles of Athens^Talk 15:02, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

@PericlesofAthens: I read the previous discussions about the lead in the archives of the Talk pages here. I recognize that the lead has seen numerous "cooks" and lots of edits in the journey to GA & FA status. In your opinion, does the organization you described here still hold true? "I carefully planned the current setup so that the first paragraph would provide essential details, the second would summarize her childhood up to the birth of her son allegedly sired by Caesar, the third paragraph would detail her relationship with Antony and their subsequent downfall, and the fourth paragraph would explain her legacy and relevance in art and popular media." Thanks. – Kekki1978 talk 16:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

@Kekki1978: Yes, I would say it's okay for the most part. On the issue of Pompey fleeing to Egypt, you highlighted a part that was highly problematic, far too vague for its own good, and desperately needed to be fixed with proper context and clarification. I can't say the same for other parts of the lead, which look okay. The overall organization of the lead section that you've mentioned here is also still intact. Pericles of Athens^Talk 18:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

I'd like to suggest some minor copy-editing of the following 2 sentences in order to help the flow. In an effort to achieve consensus, I am making the suggestion here. If there are no significant objections, I will make the change in the article. Thanks.

Original sentence: Berenice was killed in 55 BC when Ptolemy returned to Egypt with Roman military assistance.

Suggestion: After the King and Cleopatra returned to Egypt with Roman military assistance, Berenice was killed in 55 BC, allowing the King to regain power.

Original sentence: When he died in 51 BC, the joint reign of Cleopatra and her brother Ptolemy XIII began, but a falling-out between them led to open civil war.

Suggestion: The joint reign of Cleopatra and her brother Ptolemy XIII began upon the King's death in 51 BC, but a falling-out between them led to open civil war.

– Kekki1978 talk 12:52, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

@Kekki1978: hello. I'm going to have to disagree about this. Why are we emphasizing the word "king" here so much? Why are we consistently capitalizing the word "king" here without it being coupled to his name Ptolemy XII Auletes, a proper noun? The word "king" by itself is not a proper noun, even when referring to someone directly, and is only ever capitalized when combined with the monarch's name. I honestly don't see the problem with the original sentences, since they read just fine in context. Pericles of Athens^Talk 03:56, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Before I respond to @PericlesofAthens:, let me ask if anyone else is interested in chiming in. Wikipedia is a group effort, and no single article belongs to or is written by any single individual. PericlesofAthens, thank you for sharing your input.– Kekki1978 talk 15:16, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Pericles that "King" is vague and not even the correct title. The first suggestion is also longer, while the lede is long enough. T8612 (talk) 15:37, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Maccabees

She was mentioned in the Bible. I can't find any mention of the Bible in this wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 102.41.149.231 (talk) 02:17, 18 June 2020 (UTC) http://www.usccb.org/bible/1maccabees10:21 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 102.41.149.231 (talk) 02:19, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@102.41.149.231: As explained by a footnote in the page you linked to, the Cleopatra who is mentioned in 1 Maccabees is Cleopatra Thea, who lived a century before Cleopatra VII. A. Parrot (talk) 03:37, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@A. Parrot: Precisely. Cleopatra VII Philopator was only the seventh (or sixth) queen of the Ptolemaic dynasty named Cleopatra and that's just including the Ptolemies, not even all of those of the Seleucid dynasty such as Cleopatra I Syra who introduced the name to the Ptolemaic line or just other previous random Greek/Macedonian women like the sister of Alexander the Great: Cleopatra of Macedon (his only full-blooded sibling, not just a half-sister). Then we have women named Cleopatra who didn't even really exist because they were part of Greek mythology, such as Cleopatra Alcyone, wife of Meleager, or even the two daughters of Danaus named "Cleopatra". Cleopatra Thea was born in Egypt as a Ptolemaic princess but she married into the Seleucid dynasty and ruled from Syria in the 2nd century BC. Pericles of Athens^Talk 04:47, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Depiction of Cleopatra

On display are white monochrome statues of Cleopatra. There are no displays of black monochrome statues of Cleopatra. Such as this one: (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bust_of_Cleopatra) there are no displays of Cleopatra from the ‘L’Abreujamen de las estorias’ which show her skin color in stark contrast to Europeans.

The exclusion of these types of artistic depictions erases the ethnic ambiguity of Cleopatra from the historical narrative which ultimately perpetuates the trope of the civilized white body and the uncivilized brown body. Mbarrett710 (talk) 17:08, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

LOL. That "Bust of Cleopatra" is already used in the sub-article "Reign of Cleopatra" and for that matter there is already a black basalt statue of Cleopatra in the "Cultural Depictions" sub-section of this article. Also, we're talking about white marble here, which by default is white when unpainted or has lost its pigment. Cleopatra was also Macedonian Greek (i.e. colonial European), with no evidence she was native Egyptian/Nubian/African. You did read the "Ancestry" section of this article, right? Pericles of Athens^Talk 17:46, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Larger picture of Cleopatra & Cesarion

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Merlin-UK/Egypt#/media/File:SFEC-DENDERA-2010-085.JPG — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.100.232.96 (talk) 02:09, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

That's nice, but not really necessary, since the current picture in the article is an appropriate close-up on the two monarchs in carved relief, without emphasizing all the other details. The photograph you've shared here would be more useful in the article on the Temple of Dendera aillustrating how the temple looks overall. For that reason the current picture should stay and this one should be used elsewhere. Pericles of Athens^Talk 02:33, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Date of death

Surely there's a better way to present this information than simply listing off each date and its respective supporters? That's how the relevant footnote describes the issue, giving the impression that it's hotly debated, that there are lots of complicated and contradicting ancient evidence which can point to either 10 or 12 August. One of the sources, Roller, seems completely unaware of any such debate or controversy: he just baldly says the date is 10 August. The only source he in turn gives is this article by Skeat, who attributes the two-day gap to the newly-introduced Julian calendar (the footnote misleadingly cites Skeat as one of the supporters of 12 August, despite Roller using him as his source).

If neither date is technically wrong and the gap between them is just a matter of calendar reckoning, then perhaps it would be appropriate to display a single date of death, in the same calendar as the other dates in the article, and have a footnote somewhere describing the discrepancy. Avilich (talk) 20:11, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

In the first or second sentence should be mentioned that she was a pharaoh of Egypt

The subject says it all. Further it should also be mentioned in the box on the right.84.119.60.39 (talk) 13:38, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Not a bad suggestion. While the title "pharaoh" is mentioned multiple times in the body of the article, it is not found in the lead section. In the meantime, I have made a hidden link for "pharaoh" for the word "ruler" in the very first sentence of the lead. I think that should suffice. Pericles of Athens^Talk 22:24, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 April 2021

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

2600:1700:4C94:20A0:CA7:4B1C:1FD8:2710 (talk) 10:39, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

You&me

No edit requested, closing. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:10, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

The title should be changed back to Cleopatra VII

It would be more professional and academic to refer to Cleopatra VII with her regnal number than without. While most readers would call her just Queen Cleopatra, there are 7 Cleopatras in reality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.190.213.216 (talk) 02:01, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

As per WP:Commonname most people will know her as just Cleopatra, and will search for her as just Cleopatra, so this article is likely to stay at just Cleopatra. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 03:17, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Only a specialist knows there was more than one Egyptian-Macedonian or Macedonian "Cleopatra" - the common name is only known as the one most famous in history, cinema, novels, etc. Please read - and learn - and most importantly, LIVE WP:Commonname if you are going to be anything more than an annoyance on Wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.63.192 (talk) 15:05, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 May 2021

Empty request, presumed an experiment, closed. Haploidavey (talk) 07:32, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 July 2021

Another empty request. Haploidavey (talk) 05:08, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 August 2021

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

Pleaae write Cleopatra VII as her title name otherwise it is not clear in regards with all the other Cleopatras especially if used in other ARTICLES AS THE ONE ON THE TIMETABLE OF cYPRES WHERE Cleopatra III and Cleopatra VII are mentioned Savoy1956 (talk) 18:25, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. The lede already says she is Cleopatra VII. Article names are based on WP:COMMONNAME. RudolfRed (talk) 18:37, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Last active Pharoah?

Short description says “Last active pharoah …”, but the word Pharoah is never used in the article, This seems like an odd situation! Should we change the Short description to ‘last active ruler’? Or expand the article to include discussion of her title? Or neither?

JeffUK (talk) 13:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

No, the word pharaoh (with a Wiki link) is definitely used in the article, in the "Background" sub-section under the main "Biography" one. The article is long enough as it is. We don't need to go on a tangent about the use of that exceedingly common term for rulers of Egypt, especially when her other more specific titles are already explained. The Wiki article for "pharaoh" is also hidden in a link for "ruler" in the very first sentence of the lead section. I think that is more than sufficient. If people want to know more about that term, they can consult that article via the links provided. Pericles of Athens^Talk 02:03, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 October 2021

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

GabrielDorneles (talk) 01:13, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

I would like to add in the excerpt of the text where he talks about the actresses who played Claopatra, this missing mention of the 1912 movie Cleopatra starring Helen Gardner. it already has a page on wikipedia about the film and the actress

Director Charles L. Gaskill's 1912 film Cleopatra, Queen of Egypt starring Helen Gardner is noted prominently in the article List of cultural depictions of Cleopatra. It's not important for this main article on Cleopatra to list every single movie about the queen, since there are many of them and doing so would lend Gardner's film WP:Undue weight. The first film from 1899 directed by Méliès is already mentioned. Notice also how the films starring Bara, Colbert, and Taylor are mentioned in the article, noteworthy because of their enormous cultural impact and, in the case of Taylor's film, their enduring legacy. The film with Gardner didn't have the same impact on popular culture, at least not from what I have read. Without a proper academic source, I don't think it would be appropriate to even mention the film with Gardner. You're welcome to create a wholly new sub-article about Cleopatra in film, where that topic is relevant and can be rightfully covered at length. Pericles of Athens^Talk 16:03, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Not done:Going through the Edit Request backlog and am going to close this one as per the explanation provided by PericlesofAthens I Am Chaos (talk) 23:40, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

WHY IS THIS STILL TRENDING?!?!

Is there some sort of historical discovery that has been found? Turtleshell3 (talk) 17:15, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Or new tv show more likely! Johnbod (talk) 17:28, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Someone's manipulating the views. It always has between 140k-160k views.

I don't know why you'd bother though... Nswix (talk) 02:38, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

This has already been addressed above, so no need to keep spamming the talk page with repetitive discussions. Nobody is "manipulating the views", that's absurd. As one editor above kindly pointed out for us, the massive amount of views this article is receiving is almost certainly due to one of Google Assistant's main voice command suggestions for Android Samsung Galaxy phone users. The views are real, although it's impossible to say how much of the article the vast majority of these people bother to read beyond the lead section. We speculated that it might be bot activity, but that doesn't really make any sense and the mystery was basically solved above. I wouldn't have figured it out for myself because I'm an iPhone user, never owned a Samsung, and I rarely use voice commands (versus manually typing things out). Pericles of Athens^Talk 12:49, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Math

Up 2603:9001:6900:969D:3084:F73B:EC64:6E2B (talk) 19:22, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Macedonian queen

is not Macedonian greek is just Macedonian empire and Alexander and Macednonians never speak Greek they speak Macedonian like in all documents is saying language diferent then helenic not greek like helenic king Demosten was saying about Macedonian because they are barbara and they speak different language then greek 2A02:C7D:E83C:E500:3DB6:49C:571B:B543 (talk) 11:17, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

This is not the place for this argument. As cited in the article, most scholarly sources refer to Ptolemaic queen Cleopatra VII Philopator as either a "Macedonian Greek" or a "Greco-Macedonian". Also, by the reign of Cleopatra VII all Ancient Macedonians in Macedon and elsewhere spoke the universal Koine Greek as their first and native language. This article is also not a place for a debate about their language, as scholars are still unsure how it should be classified, but with a scant amount of evidence, a small majority of academics theorize it was a northwestern Doric Greek dialect. A large group of scholars who disagree with that still place it and Greek under a larger "Hellenic" branch of the Indo-European language family. A minority of scholars believe it was an entirely different Indo-European language similar to Thracian or Illyrian. This sort of discussion is irrelevant to Cleopatra, though, and we should be using the terminology favored by the majority of relevant academics in describing her ethnicity. Pericles of Athens^Talk 18:10, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Affair with Caesar in lead

Caesar declared Cleopatra and her brother Ptolemy XIV joint rulers but maintained a private affair with Cleopatra... You can only maintain something that is already there. Yet, in the lead, the affair is suddenly there. Should we change "maintained" to "started"? PizzaMan ♨♨♨ 00:09, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

The word choice is fine, actually, especially since the same sentence mentions the birth of their child Caesarion. Pericles of Athens^Talk 00:39, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

That means that both the child and the affair are suddenly there. PizzaMan ♨♨♨ 22:29, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

That's a rather rigid way to look at it; are you a native speaker of English? There's honestly nothing wrong with saying they maintained an affair, which is what they did. Pericles of Athens^Talk 13:34, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

what does the phrase "consorting directly with Caesar" mean? How about saying it in plain English? – Sca (talk) 13:12, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

It is already in plain English. You've never heard the fairly common phrase "consorting with the enemy"? To consort: habitually associate with (someone), typically with the disapproval of others. I think it's pretty fair to say Ptolemy XIII (and his eunuch handlers) disapproved of Cleopatra VII plotting and flirting with Caesar in the royal palace. The sentence in question sounds fine to me: "When Ptolemy XIII realized that his sister was in the palace consorting directly with Caesar, he attempted to rouse the populace of Alexandria into a riot, but he was arrested by Caesar, who used his oratorical skills to calm the frenzied crowd." If you have a better suggestion feel free to offer it, and perhaps do so without being slightly rude. Thanks. Pericles of Athens^Talk 13:34, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 December 2021

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

" Plutarch provides an entirely different and perhaps mythical account that alleges she was bound inside a bed sack to be smuggled into the palace to meet Caesar.[127][132][133][note 33] " add actual Plutarch source (Plut. Vit. Caes. 49.1) ((http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Plut.+Caes.+49&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0244)) "she stretched herself at full length inside a bed-sack" (Plutarch. Plutarch's Lives. with an English Translation by. Bernadotte Perrin. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press. London. William Heinemann Ltd. 1919. 7. is citation) Braw 420 (talk) 21:37, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Secondary sources are preferred. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:34, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

The notes section of the article would be littered with Plutarch passages and those of other ancient sources if we provided direct primary source quotations every time an event is described in the article. The bed sack thing is honestly not important enough to warrant that, in my opinion. The average reader will already have a difficult time navigating through all the notes and the vast majority of readers will not utilize them. Pericles of Athens^Talk 11:17, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Apologies for late reply, but surely instead of citing 3 secondary sources - which just cite the source I posted - it would be best to just post the primary source, that of Plutarch? Surely this simplifies the notes section by getting rid of three secondary sources which just themselves reference Plutarch Braw 420 (talk) 03:07, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

No. Wikipedia guidelines are firmly against that (see for instance the recent "Featured Article Review" for the article on Pericles). Wikipedia articles on history should reflect the consensus positions of modern scholarship, i.e. secondary sources. Ancient primary sources are to be used sparingly and in proper context, such as a direct quote from a primary source if it is somehow needed. Pericles of Athens^Talk 09:15, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

About where she reined

Please discuss about where she riened the most — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:8D80:4C0:8E76:6278:5945:D018:804A (talk) 00:55, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Do you mean reigned? Also, the article thoroughly covers the topic of the geographical extent of her kingdom from Egypt to Cyprus, and the domains in the Roman east that she was to rule indirectly as fiefs through Mark Antony's Donations of Alexandria. I'm not sure that I understand what you think the article should include after that. Pericles of Athens^Talk 01:29, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

I expect this is just a vacuous test comment, just slightly less vacuous than the ones that have been removed from this page as nonsense over the past few months. No doubt this page attracts so many test comments because the article receives such an absurdly high number of pageviews. A. Parrot (talk) 01:50, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Family Tree

The family tree section is confusing to me - shouldn’t there be a legend that tells you what the different line patterns (dashed, solid) mean? 2603:8080:D700:3328:5DAD:C9E2:9218:7585 (talk) 15:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Why is this article almost ALWAYS in the Wikipedia top read???

I've been keeping an eye on this article's near constant presence in the top read section on Wikipedia since September 2020. Why?! It's so bewildering!! Pomegranya (talk) 07:00, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Pomegranya This should be closer to be a WP:FORUM thread. But anyway, according to WP:POPULAR, Cleopatra has registered large amounts of "automated views". --Apoxyomenus (talk) 00:36, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

@Apoxyomenus @Pomegranya I would like to see this claim about automated views be substantiated, because another user in a now archived discussion here on the talk page already explained why this article is getting so many views. It's because of Samsung Android smartphone voice command features, which apparently includes a common illustrative suggestion to open up the Wikipedia article on Cleopatra. I would have never known this as an iPhone user, so it was quite revealing. The views are thus seemingly legit, so let's please nix this conversation, since it has no bearing on improving the current article. Pericles of Athens^Talk 04:53, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Pomegranya No questioning. Just brought an insider possible explanation I found inside WP. I also don't have problem If we eliminate the thread, as It feels like a WP:FORUM. Cheers, --Apoxyomenus (talk) 05:24, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for repeating the Samsung factor. I changed automated views for unintentional views in WP:POPULAR. Maxaxa (talk) 03:14, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Roman literature and historiography

The last paragraph of this section starts with the following sentences:

Cleopatra's gender has perhaps led to her depiction as a minor if not insignificant figure in ancient, medieval, and even modern historiography about ancient Egypt and the Greco-Roman world. For instance, the historian Ronald Syme asserted that she was of little importance to Caesar and that the propaganda of Octavian magnified her importance to an excessive degree.

This ("Cleopatra's gender has ... led to her depiction as a minor ... figure") appears to mean that she is being depicted as minor because of her gender - that she would be depicted as a major figure if she were male. However, the following sentence seems to contradict this, and say that she was treated as MORE important because of her gender. Can someone fix these sentences so they make sense? 2601:640:4000:3170:0:0:0:F6D3 (talk) 03:31, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

No, the statement is perfectly fine. Notice the stress on "even modern historiography" there; the works of Ronald Syme fall under that category. Ronald Syme is the one explicitly downplaying her importance in this example. This is an observation made by Duane W. Roller, as cited in the article. Pericles of Athens^Talk 21:45, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

@PericlesofAthens It's fine if the sentence is supposed to mean "her role in history is downplayed because she is a woman". But isn't this trying to say the opposite ("she receives MORE attention because she's female")? 2601:640:4000:3170:0:0:0:614B (talk) 04:20, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Her gaining great levels of attention is not the exact same thing as being deemed insignificant or inconsequential compared to male contemporaries. That's exactly what Syme was arguing, saying she was a figure of little importance compared to Caesar. Again, there's really nothing wrong with the sentence structure or claims being made here. That's especially the case since it is Roller (2010) who is offering this argument. This is not just some original research or opinion of mine, this is a Classicist and specialist in this field making this particular claim and using Syme as an example. Pericles of Athens^Talk 06:01, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

American English?

Why is this article written in American English? ✠ Emperor of Byzantium ✠ (talk) 13:50, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@The Emperor of Byzantium ...because I'm an American who wrote it and successfully nominated it as a featured article? ;) Quite frankly I don't mind writing in British English and conforming to its conventions of spelling and punctuation, but it is just natural for me to write things in American English. Is that really a problem? People who write in British English do not have a monopoly on articles about history, especially a biographical topic of distant antiquity that has nothing to do with the British Isles (aside from the loose association of Cleopatra's relationship with Julius Caesar, the first Roman statesman to invade the British Isles). Pericles of Athens^Talk 14:52, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Cleopatra's Parentage

Why is there all of this fanciful conjecture about Cleopatra's ancestry in an encyclopedia article? That imagination exercise, that her mother was some unknown, half Greek, half Egyptian woman with familial ties to the priesthood of Ptah?.. What?

You know this is in no way accepted by scholars- which, to be fair, the article mentions- but neither is it noteworthy enough to be given space (especially when there are so many factual episodes that have to be truncated or omitted). So why is it here? You realize that, by including it, you're giving it undue attention and elevating it to the notice of millions. I don't understand how this made it into the article in the first place, but recommend you strike it immediately.

I know this isn't a real encyclopedia, but that's just insane. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:249:9301:FF80:BDC1:4233:353D:FF68 (talk) 00:44, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Seems you're new here and do not know much about Cleopatra scholarship. Duane W. Roller is considered the most eminent scholar by many on Cleopatra. His hypothesis isn't without circumstantial evidence, and is built upon the works of prior scholars like Werner Huß, Burstein, and Hölbl. So to write this is "in no way accepted" is just simply categorically false. We cannot know for absolute certain Cleopatra's maternity, although I agree with most scholars she is Cleopatra V/VI (also of uncertain parentage) and even today I added context challenging the hypothesis. I suggest you read all of these scholarly works, instead of, presumably, here to rage about the new Netflix documentary. Kleopatra I Syra (talk) 02:49, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Not a real Encyclopedia? What do you think it is? - FlightTime (open channel) 02:54, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

It's not a real encyclopedia if it allows critical thought and academic scholarship, of course, especially if it doesn't align with certain racial biases. Kleopatra I Syra (talk) 02:57, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

@ the anonymous IP commentor: this is most certainly not an issue of WP:UNDUE WEIGHT. From what I have seen, this is a modern scholarly debate that is discussed in most biographies of the queen published in the last few decades. The article carefully navigates this topic by emphasizing that the hypothesis about a partially Egyptian mother (possibly from the priestly household of Ptah at Memphis) is still unproven and entirely conjecture. It is noteworthy in the "Ancestry" section of this article because of the frequency of its discussion in academic works. Wikipedia is merely a reflection of WP:Reliable sources, and in this case biographies on Cleopatra ranging from Burstein (2004) to Roller (2010) weigh in on the subject. In regards to the passage about her ancestry, suggesting that we "strike it immediately" in a Featured status article vetted by the Wiki community without considerable discussion or debate on the talk page is unwarranted and not how Wikipedia works; for that see WP:Consensus. Pericles of Athens^Talk 13:15, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Not a real encyclopedia? If you have any specific and concrete change, then we can talk. Let's leave the scholarship to scholars whose work has been peer reviewed by other scholars, many of whom have African heritage themselves. Many articles discuss genetics and race of great historical figures, especially if there was nonnative rulers and some degree of uncertainty requiring scholarship to fully parse. In the history of humanity there are too many examples of known minority rulers who are clearly not of the native ancestry even after many years (one example is Abaqa Khan over Ilkhanate). This is relevant and should be discussed in such a biographical article. 70.22.139.70 (talk) 20:10, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

The article does mention that Cleopatra was interred at an unknown location yet to be discovered, thus her remains have not been found for us to analyze in terms of DNA analysis or genomic reconstruction. To this day none of the Ptolemaic royal tombs or remains have been found. It is possible they were destroyed and buried beneath the waters of the Mediterranean during the various disastrous earthquakes that brought down Hellenistic era monuments like the Pharos Lighthouse of Alexandria. The recent hypothesis by archaeologists Kathleen Martinez and Zahi Hawass is that Cleopatra VII is possibly buried near the temple at Taposiris Magna. Discussions about genetics are unwarranted until we discover the remains of the Ptolemies, in particular Cleopatra. The Ancestry section of this article (in my view) does a decent job explaining her foreign origins as an ethnic Macedonian Greek of partial Iranian descent via Seleucid royal marriage. That's really all we can do for now, that and mention the modern scholarly speculation that her mother might have been partially native Egyptian (which remains entirely conjecture at this point, something that is dutifully pointed out in the article). Pericles of Athens^Talk 23:04, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

While it's inclusion is not warranted in the article, it's perhaps worthwhile to note here that ancient Greeks and Latin Romans from Italy cremated their dead and the Egyptians mummified theirs (even after becoming Romanized, see Fayum mummy portraits for instance). It is quite possible we'll never find the remains of Cleopatra or even be able to form any DNA analysis if she was cremated like most Greeks at the time. IIRC, it was Plutarch who suggested she was mummified in the Egyptian style alongside Mark Antony, but that is obviously another unproven claim per archaeology. Pericles of Athens^Talk 23:07, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

"I know this isn't a real encyclopedia" Well, we are a better example of an encyclopedia than Encyclopædia Britannica and its numerous omissions and inaccuracies. Dimadick (talk) 09:42, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Ptolemy I Soter which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 08:46, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Mother of Cleopatra

I'm going to try to change the presumed mother of Cleopatra from Cleopatra VI Tryphaena to Cleopatra V Tryphaena again, after my initial change was rudely reverted without proper justification.

The rationale for the change is as follows. If you disagree with any of the facts below discuss it here instead of simply reverting the change.

The mother of Cleopatra is not known with 100% certainty, but there is only one possible candidate who is known by name and that is Cleopatra V Tryphaena (additionally, historical consensus is that most likely she was indeed the mother).
There is some discussion about whether the person known as Cleopatra VI Tryphaena is the same person as Cleopatra V Tryphaena (which is mentioned on both these pages). If they are the same, then obviously Cleo VI is “also” the mother of Cleopatra but only because they are the same woman.
However, the Wikipedia article Cleopatra VI Tryphaena is specifically about Cleo VI as a separate person and therefore not as the mother of Cleopatra. The article also mentions that if Cleo VI existed as a separate person she would be a (half)sister to Cleopatra, not her mother.

Because the article Cleopatra VI Tryphaena is specially about Cleo VI as a separate person who is definitely not Cleopatra's mother, we should not link to that article as the presumed mother of Cleopatra! Instead, we should link to Cleo V, the only known candidate.

Additionally, the description in the info-box:

Cleopatra VI Tryphaena (also known as Cleopatra V Tryphaena)

is wrong. Cleo VI is not definitely known as Cleo V. If that were true Wikipedia wouldn't have two separate articles about the same person. Cleo VI has a separate article exactly because she was possibly a different person, and if so, definitely not Cleopatra's mother: this is mentioned with citations in the article on Cleo VI. So I'm going to go ahead and try (again!) to change the text to “Mother: presumably Cleopatra V Tryphaena” and if you want to revert it, please don't do so without providing a solid argument why my reasoning is wrong.

MaksVerver (talk) 00:37, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Changes to lead section prose

This is to alert User:Zagreus99 that you are engaged in Wikipedia:edit warring over the article's prose in the lead section, after being repeatedly asked in edit summaries to first discuss changes here on the talk page. This is one of our encyclopedia's Wikipedia:Featured articles, meaning it has already been vetted by the community for quality content and prose writing. Please do not edit the article further without discussing significant changes here, especially when introducing terms that are not common in English, such as the word "effectuate" in a context where it is not commonly used and does not make sense. Most people who read English Wikipedia will struggle to understand why that word is used there; for that matter it is not used properly. What you have done is not a drastic improvement of the prose. Regards, Pericles of Athens^Talk 23:40, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

In addition to these changes being largely unnecessary, you have also incorrectly used a hyphen for a sentence break instead of an em dash ("—"), which contrasts with the rest of the article and goes against the basic guidelines in the WP:MOS. As noted on your talk page, I have alerted the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring about your behavior. Pericles of Athens^Talk 13:50, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

User:Johnbod I thought you might want to take a look at this and provide your judgment about the latest round of edits by this user. Pericles of Athens^Talk 13:53, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

I've taken a look and reverted them. User:Zagreus99 your only edit summary on this article has been "this article needs serious tidying up", but all your edits amount to is fiddling round with the prose, sometimes making the meaning less clear, and with some grammatical errors (near "revolt"). This is an FA, written by a very experienced editor in this area, whuich seems to be a new one for you. As Pericles says, I would propose any further changes here first. Johnbod (talk) 14:30, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

@Johnbod Agreed. It would be one thing if this user found and corrected an earnest mistake, but all they really did was introduce unwanted grammatical errors, insert punctuation choices that deviate from the rest of the article and guidelines of the WP:MOS, and offer improper uses of certain terms that don't make sense in their given context. We should all observe that old adage: "if it's not broke, don't fix it." Pericles of Athens^Talk 17:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Her father

In the Infobox, her father's name is not hyperlinked but her mother's name is. Can you please hyperlink his name? Thank you. Example: Ptolemy XII should have [[ ]] around it. 74.14.11.231 (talk) 05:39, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion, but Ptolemy XII Auletes actually is already linked in the info box, in the field labelled "predecessor". We generally do not link things twice in the same info box. Pericles of Athens^Talk 07:02, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Got it! 74.14.11.231 (talk) 07:20, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Why us this article always trending?

Has been for years. Would love to know why if anyone has an insight. Lxsdms (talk) 11:18, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

It is always best to check the archives when asking a question like this. I think you may find the answer to your question at Talk:Cleopatra/Archive 5#Trending article throughout 2021. Peaceray (talk) 15:12, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

@Peaceray thanks! Lxsdms (talk) 16:18, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Burial

Is the burial location of Cleopatra VII known? If so, it should be added. 74.15.254.221 (talk) 17:46, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

No, it isn't. Johnbod (talk) 20:11, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 January 2023

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

Fix a typo: Change “Assassinations of Caesar” to “Assassination of Caesar” Elbuod (talk) 07:22, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Done - FlightTime (open channel) 07:55, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

enjoy guys... 110.37.39.207 (talk) 09:28, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

It's all junked up somebody please fix Platinum6363 (talk) 21:06, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Only One Sentence Available?

The page has been edited today to only state one sentence: "cleopatra was a girlboss and pretty slay (sic)" I'm unable to re-edit the article back to what it was. Can someone else resolve this? 76.179.12.16 (talk) 02:03, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@76.179.12.16 needs updating, apparently it's been like this for almost a full day 136.55.53.153 (talk) 03:22, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

No, it was like this for less than a minute. Johnbod (talk) 04:13, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

It's fixed when I go on the website but it still shows that sentence on the app. GamerKlim9716 (talk) 16:37, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Tap icon sed 76.77.161.145 (talk) 16:45, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

This article is poorly written, and poorly researched

Articles on Wikipedia or in any encyclopedia should not deliver an overindulgence of references, notes, and have a clear undertone of bias. Whoever wrote this article is trying to make Cleopatra fit their image of a 'Ptolemaic Greek' that lives in 'Greek Alexandria' and is 'unabashedly not Egyptian'. They support this by cherry picking sources, usually from the first 10 pages of a book (literally check almost any reference) and then supplementing these with notes to pile in more bias and references that are cherry picking again. It is not a matter of debate on whether the bias is true. It shouldn't be there to begin with.

In an article, a factual encyclopedic statement should have one or two references. Not three or four, and a note with even more in included, that reference the first 10 pages of each book. This makes someone curious about Cleopatra lost in your need to cherry-pick through literature to fit your spin. It's worthless references, plain and simple. This article is encumbered with someone's passion project to turn Cleopatra into their image.

I'm sorry that I don't ever comment on here. But this has to be said. This article is uniquely horrible. Please fix it. 98.109.137.129 (talk) 08:35, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Have you considered helping those of us who have done Cleopatra research and been trying to improve this article, or just complaining? Part of the issue is almost all scholarly sources discuss Cleopatra in a Greek context. I have tried to counterbalance this with Shelley Haley and Joyce Tyldesley, but sometimes it is what it is in regards to ancient data and the availability and nature of scholarship. Kleopatra I Syra (talk) 19:59, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Firstly, this is a Featured article vetted by the Wikipedia community of editors, and that includes its referencing; radical changes to the article should be avoided or discussed among the community of editors here, not just executed at the impulsive whim of an anonymous commenter.

Secondly, there's not a single place in the article that says explicitly that Cleopatra was, quote, "unabashedly not Egyptian." That's just a false statement, as is this claim that only the first ten pages of any cited book were consulted, when the article is littered with references from the entire length of Roller's biography, for instance. If anything the article, in the very first paragraph of the lead and later in the prose body, immediately distinguishes Cleopatra from all other Ptolemies, noting how she was the only one who cared about Egyptian culture enough to learn the native Egyptian language. The ancestry section includes a lengthy discussion about the modern hypothesis regarding her possible (yet unproven) partial Egyptian ancestry via her uncertain mother.

Thirdly, the only section of the article that speaks at length about her ethnicity or Greekness is the 'Ancestry' section at the very tail end of the article. Before that, the only parts that even mention or lightly explore this topic are the first paragraph of the lead section providing the most basic biographical details and definition of the topic, the etymology section that naturally should talk about the Greek origins of her name itself (duh), the first paragraph of the background section talking about her upbringing and spoken languages (naturally), the section "Cleopatra's kingdom and role as a monarch" which rightfully has to explain her patronage of Egyptian and Greek temples (again, making it clear she was a supporter of both Greek and Egyptian cultures), and some parts of the "Cultural depictions" subsection under "Legacy" that, surprise, naturally has to mention the Hellenistic Greek character of certain artworks depicting her versus Egyptian style ones, or the alleged literature she penned in Greek. This supposed bias that permeates the entire article is thus found in a handful of spots before it's given any kind of serious treatment in the ancestry section.

Fourthly: seriously now, just investigate this for yourself by searching all the places in the prose body of the article that the word "Greek" is even used. It's barely noticeable in the entire "Biography" section that forms roughly half the article, and really only included when it is utterly necessary (for instance, noting the only known possible writing of hers to survive in Koine Greek: γινέσθωι, ginésthōi, "make it so"). This complaint doesn't strike me as being very serious or genuinely concerned with the composition of the article, but by an anonymous editor who is primarily focused on the wording of the first paragraph of the lead section, which seems fine to me in pointing out that she was a Ptolemy (a fairly basic if not fundamental biographical detail, and removing it would be like removing the fact that the water cycle is a biogeochemical process, because...reasons! That's why!). Pericles of Athens^Talk 05:13, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Just to echo what Pericles said above, this is a featured article, which means that in order to reach this status it had to be carefully examined and approved by top wikipedia editors, so it can't be poorly written. Besides, that there is a note with 5 sources and a comment every few sentences, if anything, shows that it is not, in fact, poorly researched. Piccco (talk) 15:58, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Yep, a logical fallacy there indeed. ;) That about sums up this conversation. Pericles of Athens^Talk 15:26, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

For some reason I thought this was the Cleopatra race talk page lol Kleopatra I Syra (talk) 18:21, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

LOL. No worries! I was slightly confused by you bringing up Haley and Tyldesley, but then I just figured you were talking about the Cleopatra ethnicity sub-article in relation to this one. I think it's safe to say this article does a decent job balancing talk about Cleopatra's ethnic origins as a Macedonian Greek with her being a ruler of Egypt who embraced Egyptian culture more than the average Ptolemy. I'll leave it there and consider this conversation to be over, since our anonymous commenter seemingly has no desire to return or respond in earnest. Pericles of Athens^Talk 07:52, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

It's a wonderfully written and researched article, I don't know how you managed to make it, and I don't know how anybody could call it "poorly researched" or "poorly written". PericlesofAthens, the prose and the sourcing is honestly just out of the world, this is the perfect article. 750 h+ 13:33, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

@User:750h+, thanks for saying that! Much appreciated. I genuinely don't take offense, because the person above just came here to troll and leave without responding in earnest or making serious suggestions for improvement. Pericles of Athens^Talk 17:31, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Dude be mad all you want, but someone citing extra sources doesnt exactly prove them wrong. Anyway the information is true dispite you disliking it. You didnt even say what information you thought was true. Just an overall "NUH UHH" 204.116.232.223 (talk) 12:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Image description

In the section "Reign and exile of Ptolemy XII" the first image has the description: "Most likely a posthumously painted portrait of Cleopatra with red hair and her distinct facial features, wearing a royal diadem..."

What exactly is distinct about her facial features? - Rooiratel (talk) 08:57, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

@Rooiratel Hello. That's a judgment call made by the Egyptologist Joann Fletcher (2008) as well as Susan Walker and Peter Higgs (2001), two classicists who study this sort of thing for a living. It's a comparison made by examining her standard iconography issued on coins minted during her reign, as well as the surviving marble busts that have also been identified as her based on the same coinage. The use of a diadem crowning the head signifies royal status in classical antiquity, and was not depicted on any sort of random woman. The painted head at Herculaneum was even accompanied by motifs of Egyptian crocodiles, if the apparent link to the most notable Ptolemaic queen wasn't obvious enough to viewers without the anonymous artist scribbling her name underneath the head with big exclamation marks and arrows pointing at the head. Pericles of Athens^Talk 17:40, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

So what are her distinct facial features? - Rooiratel (talk) 07:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't see this until now. They're judging that based on the aquiline nose, her pronounced Ptolemaic chin, her eyes, etc. More important than simply relating these features in frescoes to her official coins is the consistent use of a Hellenistic style royal diadem crowning her head in each depiction. And then there are a dozen other considerations, like the fact that the painting in the House of Marcus Fabius Rufus depicts the woman as Venus Genetrix (with baby cupid most likely being Caesarion) inside a temple beyond its open doors. We know from Roman historiography that Caesar had a statue erected of Cleopatra at the Temple of Venus Genetrix within the Forum of Caesar in Rome. It doesn't take too much critical thinking to connect the dots here, hence the research papers that have been published on the subject by Walker and the agreement by major academics and biographers like Roller. Does that answer your question? Pericles of Athens^Talk 14:28, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I'm also just seeing your reponse now. I'm not doubting that it is Cleopatera. I've just been wanting to know what was distictive about her facial features. "aquiline nose, her pronounced Ptolemaic chin, her eyes, etc." answers my question, I guess. Thanks. - Rooiratel (talk) 07:35, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

[1] Bragg, Georgia. “How They Croaked by Georgia Bragg.” Goodreads, Amazon, LLC., Aug. 2019, www.goodreads.com/book/show/9111463-how-they-croaked.

[1]