Talk:Asclepieion

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hospitals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hospitals 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.HospitalsWikipedia:WikiProject HospitalsTemplate:WikiProject HospitalsHospital articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Greece High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Is "Asclepeion" an accepted alternate spelling for "Asclepieion"? It shows up in the article for Bergama. Kanenas (talk) 02:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's the norm. Thank you. Moved the article.--Wetman (talk) 18:22, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is not true; the norm is Asklepieion. See every other Wikipedia article in the language list, and compare the Greek. It should be moved back to the correct spelling. (And I might add the current article is an utter mess, with spellings seemingly at random.) Languagehat (talk) 14:57, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should "Temple of Asklepios," "Sanctuary of Asklepios," or similar phrases redirect here? I was looking for information on the Sanctuary of Asklepios at Kos a few days ago and couldn't find any. Now I stumble across it here. nqdp 02:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by NQDP (talk • contribs)

To my thinking, the term "not unlike" is a nondescript weasel word and should be replaced with a word such as similar or "much like." 204.75.251.6 (talk) 14:26, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious

The article Asclepius also makes this claim at Asclepius#Birth, where it has been tagged dubious. See also Asclepius#Etymology. Discussion is at Talk:Asclepius#Etymology

73.219.226.54 (talk) 05:57, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Asclepeion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:06, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Kos-34.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:49, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Era

- An article's established era style should not be changed without reasons specific to its content; seek consensus on the talk page first (applying Wikipedia:Manual of Style § Retaining existing styles) by opening a discussion under a heading using the word era, and briefly stating why the style should be changed.
— MOS:ERA

This article is about part of the classical Greek religion, the Christian era labels are less appropriate than the secular ones and thus should be changed. Stochastioscopy (talk) 22:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's a generic argument for changing any and all articles about Greek religion, which this article only partly concerns; its main subject is ancient Greek medicine. The use of BC/AD across articles of either sort is normal on Wikipedia and there is no consensus for such generic changes. NebY (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]