Talk:Return of the Heracleidae

Anthropology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Greece Low‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mythology Low‑importance

	Mythology portal This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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]

Re Neater this way?

I usually prefer to put the ancient sources under the modern ones; they shouldn't be the main thing that the article cites anyway. Regardless, I think any difference is just mainly stylistic. But for the question mark at the end, I wouldn't have commented. Ifly6 (talk) 22:48, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can see it both ways -- looked a bit odd, to my eyes, with the much smaller section underneath the much bigger one, particularly as that requires inverting the alphabetical order of those sections. But I wouldn't have a major objection if you swapped it back. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 06:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pushed to mainspace

This is now good to go, I think -- there might be some changes to make in dialogue with the new Dorian invasion, but by and large I think we've got what we're going to get here, and it's certainly better than a redirect. Will put the draft up for deletion and move these conversations to Talk:Return of the Heracleidae. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 20:44, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]