This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek people 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
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Why are the references in this article so poorly done? Which version of Diogenes is being used? Which translation? With whom was it published? When? There are what looks like page references here which are entirely useless without knowing which version is used... Whoever started this article clearly was using a source document to refer to it, yet never mentions the source version...
I don't think the references are poorly done. Although references to modern scholars might be added, I find it extremely useful to have references to the original texts on which every modern theory must needs be based. The references to Diogenes Laërtius are, obviously, by the page numbers of Meibom's 1692 edition which is the standard way of referring to this text in any modern edition (just as Plato is referred to by the pages of Stephanus' edition and Aristotle by Bekker's). The use of standard references has the great advantage of making us independent of a particular edition. The other references are also traditional. By the way, "whoever started this article" has a name: Singinglemon (as you could have found in the page's history), and he did a very good job.
As to your second point. Timocrates was a renegade Epicurean, who is believed to have been largely responsible for the malicious stories told about Epicurus in antiquity and consequently for Epicurus' bad reputation. He is referred to as Metrodorus' brother for two reasons: he needs to be distinguished from another Timocrates, and it is a salient piece of information that Epicurus' biggest enemy was the brother of E.'s best friend. --Fabullus (talk) 14:47, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
