User talk:152.61.40.231

May 2023

Hello, I'm Veverve. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Confraternity Bible, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Veverve (talk) 00:13, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

I'd like to know what a reliable source is. I have a link to the NAB on Encyclopedia.com that corroborates much of what I say (https://www.encyclopedia.com/religion/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/new-american-bible), is that not a reliable source? You also removed my source for the new publications of the confraternity. This is the second time you have done this. You claim that the source says none of this but that source was clearly proof that those new publications exist. The other information is largely covered on other sources I have already added. Please tell me how I am supposed to format the text so you stop deleting most of what I write.(152.61.40.231 (talk) 00:52, 9 May 2023 (UTC))

• This encyclopedia.com entry is reliable.
• The Saint Sophia Institute edition is indeed mentioned, but that is about it; nothing in the paragph was to be found in the source
• The other information is largely covered on other sources I have already added: WP:BLOGSs are almost never acceptable, and in this case they are not

But: please, look at the source and then add the information you have read. Adding a source to what is already written is most of the time not a good idea. Veverve (talk) 01:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Ahasuerus

Ahasuerus is the Hebrew version of Artaxerxes. The Bible also knows the Aramaic version, which has been translated as Artaxerxes. So I would say the two kings in Ezra 4 actually are the same king. Since the later king in Ezra 7 is Artaxerxes II, the one in Ezra 4 would be Artaxerxes I, just as the kings of Esther and Nehemiah. Which also would imply the king Cyrus before Artaxerxes I in Ezra 1 actually is Xerxes, named after his grandfather Cyrus the great. Ezra also mentiones the daric coin minted by Darius I, so Xerxes would fit since he was his son.

When you split Ahasuerus in two, you get: Aha=Arta and Suerus=Cyrus=Xerxes.

Just a note for your information, no references, just logic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:1C02:130C:5200:A5E1:FBDF:30ED:516D (talk) 19:14, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps an additional note. The official king's title was changed by Xerxes from king of the Babylonians to king of the Persians and Medes (Roman Ghirshman, Iran). You can find this shift in the book of Daniel. Unto Darius the old title is used, but with Cyrus it becomes the new one. Which identifies these kings as Darius I and Xerxes. Daniel 6:29 suggests the Daniel of Daniel 1-5 refers to another person. Possibly and probably to Zarathustra, the founder of Zoroastrianism which actually became the religion of Darius I and Xerxes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:1C02:130C:5200:E19A:D472:8A5B:84C (talk) 14:04, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

December 2023

Hello, and thank you for removing vandalism from Ashurbanipal. We appreciate this, but unfortunately your edit was not successful in restoring the article to its pre-vandalised state. For future reference, it is better to deal with vandalism by checking the article's page history to determine how it appeared before it was vandalised. You can then restore the whole article, or the relevant part of it, to an appropriate earlier version. If you simply delete the visible vandalism then any content removed or overwritten by the vandal is lost. See How to deal with vandalism for details. Thank you. - Sumanuil. _{(talk to me)} 22:40, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

---