Talk:Nyx

Comments

shouldn't [Ponos] be poine?

Close and probably cognate, but a different word. Bacchiad

The section discussing Nyx as portrayed in Homer includes a statement which, while true on the surface, is greatly misleading. Generally speaking, Zeus's power is never conceived of as absolute. Using the same source, Zeus's inability to alter the will of the Fates is promoted by numerous deities and accepted by Zeus himself (however reluctantly); Zeus's respect for the strength of his own brother, Poseidon, is also acknowledged when the two elementals nearly come to blows, before Poseidon reluctantly accepts his (only slightly) subserviant role before Zeus). There are other places in myth where Zeus is also limited in his abilities or the conception of his abilities are limited by those believing in him (this is especially evident in the story of Thetis, whom Zeus feared to have a child by because of his concerns that he would be overthrown (as was prophesied in various accounts) by the offspring born of such a union which was destined (again, according to prophecy) to be stronger than the father. Consequently, I am removing the "offending" quote.

i'm her sons and i don't want you to show my mother's picture but i need you to show my picture in my father's page. his name is Erebus but i am Geras. Supagornmasang (talk) 17:20, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Modern Homages

My edit concerning Nyx in Persona 3 was replaced, removing most relevant information about her appearance. Can it be reverted, or rewritten to include a more complete summary? Gr3yfxx (talk) 08:17, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Redirect

Since it doesn't make much sense for the main "Nyx" article to lead to this page, I've moved all the content of this page to that article. Most things named "Nyx" are named after this goddess, and where they are not, readers can refer to the NYX disambiguation page. Godheval (talk) 16:28, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Note: comments above this point were from the Nyx (mythology) article that was cut-and-pasted to Nyx on August 6, 2008. I have merged their histories. Cool Hand Luke 15:10, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Mythological Nyx and Disambiguation

Since almost everything named "Nyx" on this disambig page was named for the Greek goddess/concept, a search for "Nyx" should lead to her page, with a link to a disambig page. "NYX" in all caps will still lead to the disambig page. Godheval (talk) 01:14, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Upon further consideration, it doesn't make sense for "Nyx" to lead straight to Nyx (mythology), when it can be the article in itself - for the reasons above. Godheval (talk) 16:26, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

vandalism

Someone should probably fix this article, given that the introduction of it is a promotion of someone's crappy book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.173.83 (talk) 23:55, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Parentage of Thanatos

In this page, Thanatos is listed under Nyx's sons by parthenogenesis. However, on Thanatos's page, his father is said to be Erebus. Also on Thanatos's page is a picture of "Thanatos with his half-brother Hypnos (who is also listed as a son of Nyx by parthenogenesis). Can anyone resolve this issue? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.151.70.200 (talk) 17:00, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Several comments are needed

This article is mediocre and it needs some fixes. I would like to point out a few things.

1. "Nyx stood at or near the beginning of creation, and was the mother of personified gods such as Hypnos (sleep) and Thánatos (death)."

If no source is available, I would remove this sentence. Hypnos and Thanatos are listed later on with a source.

2. "This mirrors the portrayal of Ratri (night) in the Rigveda, where she works in close cooperation but also tension with her sister Ushas (dawn)."

Is this a comment? If this has to do with Indian mythology, then let's spell it out. I don't see the connection otherwise.

3. "In other texts[citation needed] she may be the mother of Charon (with Erebus), and Phthonus "envy" (with Dionysus?)."

This is garbage. There is no source. I would remove it.

4. "There is also rumor that Nyx gave birth to her reincarnation, a son whose name would also be Nyx. But she gave birth to twins, having a daughter as well, who was named Hemera, "Day". The text implied that Hemera was not the sister of Aether, but the sister of Nyx's reincarnation."

Are we going by rumors? Does it matter what the neighbor says about mythology now? If no sources are available, the above is useless.

5. The list of Nyx's children is not very appropriate because it does not list the children by source (Hesiod and others). It's like a laundry list. I think children should be split according each source.

ICE77 (talk) 04:08, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't know why, but this article attracts a steady stream of half-infomed contributors and outright vandals, so I'm not surprised by its poor state. I'm only vaguely familiar with the subject, enough to revert the most obvious nonsense. Obviously, anyone who can improve the article is most welcome. A formal/technical note: the hatnote you repositioned ought to be at the article's top. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:49, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Original myth

“ The original myth about Nyx, the beautiful goddess of the night is that she was born of Chaos which took place after the egg of Phanes hatched (see: creation according to Greek myth) alongwith her five siblings .... ”

Reverting as I'm skeptical of the assertion that one account is "original"; this replaces a passage that at least is sourced (to Hesiod). Also, what does it mean that "Chaos took place"? —Tamfang (talk) 19:07, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Her birth from Chaos took place, ya dope. —Tamfang (talk) 05:34, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Your skepticism seems warranted to me, as does your revert. "Original" is always a poor word to use with reference to mythology, and that quote is reflective of an Orphic cosmogony: there is already a section (unsourced) covering Orphica.  ^davidiad_.: 19:44, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Species

Why is she called a goddess? She was a deity, yes, but she wasn't classified as a "god". theoi.com even calls her and her kin "Protogenoi". I mean, the Titans weren't called gods either, and they're even younger than the Protogenoi. 91.177.145.108 (talk) 18:02, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

This touches on a wider issue which is probably better discussed at Talk:Greek primordial deities. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:29, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Morpheus

Why is she Morpheus listed under Nyx's sons? Isn't he the son of Hypnos? Ovid mention at leaste three sons of hypnos: Morpheus, Phobetor and Phantasos. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.203.115.43 (talk) 03:52, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Children lost

Over a series of edits on 8 September, the section "Children" was removed. Unless it was blatantly wrong, there's no reason to remove it and it should be restored to its state in this version from 29 July by User:Paul August. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:49, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure we really need such a section. The children mentioned by Hesiod (with cites) are already listed. These are the "main" ones. The Orphic tradition is also touched on. But if we do add back that section it needs to be carefully sourced. Paul August ☎ 11:52, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

I only thought that the disappearance of such a long-standing section ought to be well considered. If you think it's problematic and unnecessary, I defer to your expertise. All the best, -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:14, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

That's my current thinking anyway ;-) One of the problems, as I see it, in a list like that, is the lumping together of — and thus confusing — different traditions. Paul August ☎ 14:27, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree, Paul. I'm all for simplification, but not if it misrepresents the topic. I just noticed your tagging of the assertion that Phanes is a "child" of Nyx; which I can't confirm or deny, but the language - "child", "parent" or what have you - may not be appropriate to topic; almost certainly not for Nyx/Phanes. We seem to be dealing with some dreadfully difficult Orphic stuff ; Nyx and the world-egg (or Nyx as the world-egg), from which Phanes (or Eros) emerges as first progenitor, and then comes a whole sheaf of cosmic destructions and recreations - the following is the simplest presentation I've come across; [1]. (Nyx is mentioned only once - more results with "Night" and "Semele"). Haploidavey (talk) 21:38, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Nyx being the "mother" of Phanes could be by way of Phanes being identified with Eros. In any case, I was just looking at that section in passing — it needs work. Paul August ☎ 23:15, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Missing: Maniae

Maniae "...are presumed to be daughters of Nyx.", not just on Wikipedia. GreekMythology.com Maniae. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 05:36, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Image censor

The image is way to sexual and needs to be censored — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:8E80:1020:A8FC:E3CC:BBD0:9CBB (talk) 21:31, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. The image could be considered by many to be offensive. Mobius Anticuus —Preceding undated comment added 19:02, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

They'll get over it. Wikipedia is not censored and unless someone can find a better image I think it's there to stay. Psychotic Spartan 123 04:38, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Day and Sky

Day is supposed to be masculine, as historically been so for at least two Times (rupture of Sky from Earth)? Day survives, but mankind dies, does Day give birth to new mankind after rupture of Sky from Earth, therefore should Day be feminine? 198.71.29.39 (talk) 18:45, 1 August 2022 (UTC) Day and Sky of damage give birth to new people, mankind? Can one argue that Night and Sky gave birth to new people or would it be more customary that Night and Day gave birth to new people? Night and Day gave birth to a new Sky, so the feminine may have had more than one Child?

Wiki Education assignment: HUM 202 - Introduction to Mythology

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MildActsOfMayhem (article contribs). Peer reviewers: 1347peaches.

— Assignment last updated by Berserkz (talk) 00:56, 25 October 2022 (UTC) MildActsOfMayhem I have peer reviewed your article 1347peaches (talk) 22:09, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Is the Bougeareau painting meant to show the mythological god Nyx?

Is the main image actually of the goddess Nyx or is it unrelated to her? I searched the painting and I could not find any evidence that the painting is connected to Nyx. 73.73.127.102 (talk) 05:31, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Good question. I suspect it's just a generalized personification of night, rather than specifically Nyx. In any case there are many examples of ancient Greek pottery which depict Nyx, any of these would be much better here. Paul August ☎ 15:33, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. Anyone who wants to change it, feel free to do so. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:59, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Sources

Just removed one whose content is aimed at juveniles. The last three (as timestamp in this post) should go, imho. No clear authorship, scholarly standing or named referals. As Far as I can tell, all three deal with the topic at "in universe" level. Haploidavey (talk) 13:44, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, removed. This page has quite a way to go in terms of sourcing. – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:49, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Indeed. Paul August ☎ 13:53, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Children lost 2

Wikipedia has a bunch of different articles that list Nyx's children, and the lists are all different, so I edited this article to combine them, and add sources. I'm not an expert on the original sources, but I know how to combine information from multiple articles. I added the missing children, along with sources, but someone reverted my change and suggested we discuss it here first. So feel free to discuss. - Burner89751654 (talk) 14:29, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

It would be helpful if you would give some examples of the additional children you want to add to the article, so we can discuss whether or not they should be added to the article. Thanks. Paul August ☎ 16:38, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

You can see my whole edit using the "View history" feature here. But a few examples are Dolos and Ponos from Cicero and Eleos and Epiphron from Hyginus. - Burner89751654 (talk) 21:25, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

It has been said above, but perhaps is worth repeating here: we should be cautious in assigning equivalence to Roman and Greek deities - or, come to that, any deities at all. Cicero is mentioned. As far as I know, his works are in Latin. So are Ovid's. Anglicised versions of Latin and Greek deities, be they major or minor, and presumed equivalent or essentially the same, are modern artefacts. Haploidavey (talk) 04:20, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for providing these examples, so we all can be clear exactly which entities you are talking about. Both Cicero and Hyginus are Romans writing in Latin about the Roman goddess Nox, who although clearly related (often described as "equivalent" since both names mean "night") to the Greek Nyx, should most definitely not be treated as identical to Nyx. Here is what Cicero 3.17 says:

Amor Dolus Metus Labor Invidentia Fatum Senectus Mors Tenebrae Miseria Querella Gratia Fraus Pertinacia Parcae Hesperides Somnia, quos omnis Erebo et Nocte natos ferunt.

And here is Racham's translation:

Love, Guile, Fear, Toil, Envy, Fate, Old Age, Death, Darkness, Misery, Lamentation, Favour, Fraud, Obstinacy, the Parcae, the Daughters of Hesperus, the Dreams: all of these are fabled to be the children of Erebus and Night.

So yes Cicero does list "Dolus" (from the Greek word "dolos" meaning trickery) as an offspring of Nox. But that is not the same thing as saying that, in any Greek tradition the Greek goddess Nyx, was ever considered to have an offspring named "Dolos". As for Ponos", notice that Cicero does not anywhere use the name "Ponos". He does mention the name "Labor" which come from the Latin word labor which Racham here translates as "Toil", however we should not assume that this "Labor" is necessarily the same thing as "Ponos", even though that name is used in the Greek tradition (where Ponos is said to be the offspring of Eris), and is also a personification of the Greek word for "work".

More importantly however, no matter how we might interpret Cicero, no scholarly secondary source (that I'm aware of, and I'm aware of most) mentions "Dolos" or "Ponos" as being the offspring of Nyx, see for example Hard, pp. 25–31 (cited in the article) which in his seven page discussion on Nyx's offspring mentions neither.

Much the same can be said for the list of offspring given by Hyginus. Paul August ☎ 13:28, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

There are bound to be discrepancies in articles about Greco-Roman mythology, but that's because there are discrepancies inherent in Greco-Roman mythology itself, as it was developed over hundreds of years by multiple sources. And while there are discrepancies between some Greek sources and some Roman sources, they're often no greater than the discrepancies between two different Greek sources. That's an argument for specifying which account comes from which source (which I did), but not for excluding sources altogether.

I have no problem with you adding a note that Cicero and Hyginus are Roman sources, if you think that's worth noting. And it's true that some Roman gods are more loosely associated with Greek gods than others (like Camenae and the Muses). But in general, the links between Greek and Roman mythology are pretty well established, and included in almost every source on the subject, including literally hundreds of articles on Wikipedia. Not least of which are the articles for Dolos, Ponos, Eleos, and Epiphron, which already link to this article for Nyx, despite your reluctance to include them in the article. If you're questioning that, then you're just making yourself look silly, and I don't think continuing to talk to you will be a good use of my time. So I'll leave it up to you guys. - Burner89751654 (talk) 14:28, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

A useful source

@Michael Aurel: (and others): A useful source, especially with respect to how Nyx is portrayed in Orphic literature, might be Athanassakis and Wolkow's Orphic hymn 3 To Night (pp. 6–7), and their notes on that hymn (pp. 76–78). Paul August ☎ 12:27, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I've read Athanassakis and Wolkow's notes on the hymn, and thought they were a quite good summary of the topic. As to the hymn itself, I am thinking it would probably best be addressed in a "Sources" section (I've also managed to find little beyond Meisner, p. 206 which mentions her role there). Currently, I think that one more paragraph in the "Mythology" section is warranted, discussing her role prophesying to Zeus, her role as "nurse of the gods", and her cave. Then the discussion of the more complex issues, such as Hermias' "Three Nights", could be reserved for the "Sources" section. Comments and feedback are of course always appreciated as I go. – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:22, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

My motivation for pointing out Athanassakis and Wolkow, was this edit. But I'm glad to see you've read Athanassakis and Wolkow; and Meisner (along with West of course) is an excellent source for all things Orphic. So, as far as I can see, you seem to be well armed with all the right arrows in your quiver ;-) Paul August ☎ 13:53, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Ah yes, that makes sense. – Michael Aurel (talk) 14:02, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Betegh

Betegh says the following:

West, on the other hand, claims that we find the following generations of the same genealogy, ascribed to ‘descendants of gods’ in Plato’s Timaeus 40e:

From Ge and Ouranos the children born were Okeanos and Tethys; from these, Phorkys and Kronos and Rhea and all of the brood; from Kronos and Rhea, Zeus and Hera and all their brothers and sisters we hear tell of; and again from these more children.

West does not consider it a difficulty that Eudemus tells us only that, in the version he knows, Night was the first deity, while there is absolutely no mention of Night in Timaeus’ account. Plato had to leave out Night, West argues, for in Timaeus’ account all gods are engendered by the Demiurge and we have just learnt, on the other hand, that night is something merely produced by the earth’s shadow (40c) and is a unit of time. [He then continues on with some further discussion, mostly his own evaluation of West's theory.]

I should add that there are quite a few missing cites in that section (or cites which could be added), which hopefully I will get around to adding soon enough. – Michael Aurel (talk) 11:02, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
@Paul August: (Though I'm sure, of course, that you have this page on your watchlist.) – Michael Aurel (talk) 11:30, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I'm sure you will get to any missing cites in good time. Don't mean to rush you. The missing West cite stood out though. Paul August ☎ 11:44, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Of course. – Michael Aurel (talk) 12:01, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Infobox

The current infobox has the following issues:

• Abode: We have no source which states this. Hesiod describes her home as being in the far West.
• There is no such thing as one "Orphic" version. There are multiple problems here:

• Having Phanes as the parent of Nyx with the tag "(Orphic)" is highly problematic, as Nyx is described as the first being to exist in the earliest Orphic accounts.
• Nyx is described as the mother of Uranus in multiple accounts, but only in some of them is she the mother of both Uranus and Gaia, which the infobox does not take into account.
• In the version in which Nyx is the mother of Uranus, it is either without a father, or, as certain scholars have suggested, possibly by Aether (or Phanes), while, in the version in which she is the mother of Uranus and Gaia, it is by Phanes (or, in another possible version, it may be without a father). Again, the infobox does not take this into account, and only has Erebus in the "Consort" parameter, which seems to suggest that in Orphic cosmogony Uranus and Gaia are the offspring of Nyx and Erebus, which is definitely not the case.

• Describing Chaos as her "parent" implies a role which is not given by Hesiod, who simply describes that Nyx and Erebus "came forth" from Chaos. Also, "offspring" is a better label for Nyx's progeny than "children" is, though this is a minor point.

If you want me to elaborate on any of these points, I can. As I said, I am not against having an infobox altogether, but we need to decide upon a version which addresses the above points. Also, please keep discussion of this reasoned and civil. – Michael Aurel (talk) 03:59, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

This is in response to this, for the interested. As IPs can't be pinged, I've notified the user on their talk page. – Michael Aurel (talk) 08:23, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

I agree with all the reasons given above for why the current infobox is problematic. In particular:

• I've removed the Tartrus being her "abode", since I agree we have no source for this.
• How to treat Orphic considerations in an infobox will often be complicated, but also often not be needed at all. In this case I think listing Phanes as her "Orphic" parent is misleading so I've also removed that.
• That "parent" is not quite the right word to describe the relationship of Chaos to Nyx, and that "children" is not best way to describe Nyx's offspring points out one of the (several) intrinsic problems with infoboxes: their uniformity leads to forcing round pegs into square holes. Not sure what to do about this here.

In addition I have another issue with this infobox. Even though I think I might have been the last one to edit this, I still find the current "Children" section to be too complicated and confusing. Not sure what to do here either.

Paul August ☎ 12:54, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

I did not mean to readd the infobox with this edit (apparently I was editing an old version of the article) So I've now deleted it again. Paul August ☎ 13:18, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Yep, I assumed so. – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:33, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Responding to these points:

• Agree.
• Agree with the removal, and I would go further and suggest we remove Orphic versions altogether. I don't think there is really any way we can present such information in the infobox without misrepresenting it in some way.
• "Forcing round pegs into square holes" is a good description... I'm not really sure there is anything that can be done about this though; I think we either have to accept these issues, or, of course, we could simply remove the infobox altogether.

Personally, I would have no problem with removing the infobox, though others might take issue with the page not having one. Although, really, what are we missing? The second sentence of the lead covers Chaos, Erebus, Aether and Hemera, and then the sentence after that states that she produces a number of offspring without a father. The other point you've made is a good one. The presentation of those offspring in the article is accompanied by Gantz's translations, which hopefully conveys the matter in a way which makes sense to the reader. However, I feel as though our reader is going to be somewhat confused by a list which reads "Moros, Ker, Thanatos, Hypnos, the Oneiroi, Momus, Oizys, ..." with no sort of explanation. I know that infoboxes do play a useful role in presenting key information, but in this specific instance I feel as though the downsides are beginning to outweigh the benefits...

– Michael Aurel (talk) 13:31, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes I agree with all that. Let's see what (if anything) other editors have to say about this. Paul August ☎ 14:12, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

As it has been the best part of a week, and this has received no response, I will leave the page without an infobox. – Michael Aurel (talk) 00:41, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Michael Aurel, I read the discussion and I was thinking of replying a little earlier, but I was a little busy. Personally, I would be in favour of including an infobox, since Nyx is not a minor deity, but with some corrections, as you mentioned above. I think the terms "parent", "children", "daughter" etc. aren't necessarily wrong and these are the terms mostly used today by most people, like in the sources 1, 2 cited in the article. At least, since this is the best way it can be described in an infobox, I would prefer this than nothing at all. (I just saw that infobox deity has an "offspring" option, which is better than "children") Personally, I find infoboxes very helpful, so if one was to be removed, it would have to be completely wrong and impossible to correct, but in this case, I think we could work with something. Piccco (talk) 09:15, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Alright, sure. I was not aware of the "offspring" field, using that would be preferable to "children". I think "parent" is still imperfect, and there are others issues which have been discussed above, though I won't oppose an infobox assuming it addresses those issues and there are editors who think the page would benefit from having one. Maybe it would be easiest if you suggested a possible replacement? Then we can work from there. – Michael Aurel (talk) 10:57, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

I understand your point about the word "parent", but this might not really be an issue, since the sources already use terms that we use to describe familial relatioships like "daughter", "mother" etc. As for the content of the infobox, I think we could just go with Hesiod's Theogony. Piccco (talk) 11:44, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

That seems workable, would you like to suggest a replacement? – Michael Aurel (talk) 11:49, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't have any specific suggestions to make. From what I see, most of the content in the infobox was according to Theogony (except for Phanes), so, if we agree to include it in the article, most of it would remain the same, with the indications that were already included clarifying that we follow Hesiod's cosmogony. Maybe instead of consort, Erebus could be listed as a sibling(?) Also, in regards to 'adobe', at first I wasn't sure about Tartarus if it was unsourced, but from what I see here, she stays in Tartarus during daytime, when Hemera is out, and leaves at night, so maybe that was also correct. Piccco (talk) 12:22, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

What I meant is that it would be helpful for myself and other editors to see the infobox you are suggesting that we add (even if it is largely the same as that which was previously in the article); perhaps paste the proposed infobox below. Other editors may not have seen the infobox which was removed, and, if there are any issues with the proposed infobox, it would allow us to address those here.

In the Theogony, Erebus and Nyx both arise from Chaos, so they are often referred to as siblings, though I don't know whether this is really more significant than Erebus' role as the father of Aether and Hemera. As to "abode", this is covered near the beginning of the "Sources" section: Hesiod describes her home as being in the far west, and later, in a (rather confused) description of the underworld, he seems to locate it somewhere near the entrance to the underworld. I have seen that Tripp states that her home is in Tartarus, but I think it would be better for us to follow Gantz here, who discusses the matter in somewhat more detail (and is cited in the article); we can only unambiguously state that Hesiod considers her to live in the far west, and "Abode: Tartarus" is not really an accurate representation of our sources. I would suggest omitting the abode field altogether, as it is better discussed in the article itself, where it can be addressed with more nuance. – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:12, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh okay, wasn't sure what you meant at first. It's almost the same basically. I included Erebus as both sibling and consort (as in Hemera or Erebus)(?). In regards to 'adobe', since other scholars, like Tripp, identify this passage as referring to the Underworld/Tartarus, seems clear to me that this is where her realm was meant to be located, but I don't have a very strong opinion about this.

Nyx
Goddess and personification of the night
Nyx is shown driving to the left in a chariot pulled by two horses. To the right of her is Helios, who ascends into the sky in his quadriga at the start of the new day. Attic terracotta lekythos, attributed to the Sappho Painter, c. 500 BC.
Genealogy
Parents	Chaos
Siblings	Erebus
Consort	Erebus
Offspring	According to Hesiod: Aether, Hemera (with Erebus) Moros, Ker, Thanatos, Hypnos, the Oneiroi, Momus, Oizys, the Hesperides, the Moirai, the Keres, Nemesis, Apate, Philotes, Geras and Eris (without a father)
Equivalents
Roman	Nox

Piccco (talk) 13:44, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. A few comments:

• We should use the picture of the lekythos currently at the top of the article, rather than the Bouguereau painting.
• I do think really think it would be better to exclude the "abode" field (if you have access to Gantz, I would suggest reading pp. 127, 129). If you want me to elaborate on this I can, but, despite what Tripp says, I don't think that "Abode: Tartarus" is an accurate representation of our sources, and that treating the issue in the article's body is a better idea.
• We don't need to have "(?)" after Erebus as her sibling, though I'm also not sure that we need to have Erebus as her sibling in the infobox at all.
• We should use "offspring" instead of "children", as discussed above.
• There is also the issue of the list of her offspring (see the discussion above), though I won't oppose the infobox on this basis if other editors don't see this as an issue.

– Michael Aurel (talk) 14:30, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh yes, the question marks were for your opinion, not for permanent use. Also, ok, the lekythos as more ancient could be used in the lead. In regards to the adobe, its ok you don't need to elaborate. And finally yeah, I forgot to change to 'offsprings'. Piccco (talk) 14:37, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Ok, that makes sense. I see you've changed the image, and I've also removed the "abode" field from the infobox (hopefully that's alright). I think the above is probably the most problem-free version of the infobox we will reach. As both myself and Paul August seemed to have no issues with the page not having an infobox, though, I think it is best we wait a few days, to see what other editors think. Assuming that a few other editors are in favour of the infobox being added (and there are no objections), I will put it into the article. – Michael Aurel (talk) 14:58, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Ok we can wait for now. Regardless of what the final decision wil be, what I liked the most about the infobox was the Bouguereau image, which seems to have been in use since 2006. I think it's worth keeping it in a different section of the article. Piccco (talk) 15:29, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't think it's appropriate as the main image, but if you think it would be of relevance somewhere else in the text, sure, you can add it back. – Michael Aurel (talk) 15:38, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

For my part I will just say that, while I know that Infoboxes can be useful, they are, by their very one-size-fits-all nature, also often misleading, and for that and other reasons (for example that they accrete cruft, by providing an attractive coatrack for drive-by editors to easily hang inaccurate, misleading, or accurate, but nevertheless unhelpful, content). So I generally disfavor infoboxes. However as infoboxes go, I agree that this one is relatively "problem-free". I will add that one point in favor of having an inbox is that the lack of one also acts an encouragement for drive-by editors to add one, and better the devil you know ... Paul August ☎ 17:01, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

I should clarify that by "the most problem-free version version we will reach" I essentially meant "this one still has problems, but we probably aren't going to come to anything better", rather than suggesting it was itself "problem-free". As this page apparently has four hundred watchers, hopefully this will receive some input from other editors. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:38, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

That's what I understood you to mean. Paul August ☎ 13:56, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh, nevermind then. I must have been the one misreading. – Michael Aurel (talk) 20:30, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

I will add that my motivation in removing the infobox was not necessarily for the page to not have one, but for a consensus to be gained on the matter, to prevent whatever we have being continuously changed (as it was at the time). – Michael Aurel (talk) 11:09, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

By the way, I also wanted to thank/congratulate you for your amazing contribution in the improvement of this article. Piccco (talk) 14:32, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I was really quite surprised by how underwritten it was in its previous state. – Michael Aurel (talk) 14:40, 8 July 2023 (UTC)