Talk:Lion of Amphipolis

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.

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.

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology 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.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This page incorporates content from Λέων της Αμφίπολης, a page hosted on another Wikimedia Foundation project. Please consult the history of the original page to see a list of its authors.

Untitled[edit]

TONGUE Do we really need to cite a news article that offers no scholarly sources but an "opinion" that the lion is tongueless to keep a secret? Giant monuments are not usually constructed for the purpose of secret-keeping, and I can find no evidence, after reading the cited article in Greek, that this opinion is widely held, or attributed to someone with particularly scholarly credentials. Perhaps the section should be worded, "One newspaper article opines that the tongue was omitted to keep the lion's "mystery." 68.14.83.74 (talk)Lucretius6 — Preceding undated comment added 03:43, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; perhaps if the text was worded better and there was a better source I could agree to keep, but for the time being I've removed it Gts-tg (talk) 17:21, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]