text:
Prijedor

Prijedor (Приједор, ) is a city in Bosnia and Herzegovina. As of 2013, it had a population of 89,397 inhabitants within its administrative limits. Prijedor is situated in the northwestern part of the Bosanska Krajina geographical region.

Prijedor is known for its mixed religious heritage comprising Eastern Orthodox Christianity, Roman Catholicism and Islam. Historic buildings from the Ottoman and Austrian-Hungarian periods are a feature of the urban landscape. The city underwent extensive renovation between 2006 and 2009.

Geography
The urban centre of Prijedor, within the city of Prijedor, is located in the northwestern part of Bosnia and Herzegovina, on the banks of the Sana and Gomjenica rivers, and at the southwestern hills of the Kozara mountain. The area of the municipality is 833 km2. The town is situated at 44°58'39" N and 16°42'29" E, at an altitude of 133 m above sea level.

It is traditionally a part of the historical and cultural region of Bosanska Krajina in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The terrain ascends to the northeast of Prijedor in waves and gradually becomes the mountain range of the Kozara mountain, which is famous for uprisings in the previous centuries and battles against fascism during the Second World War.

The city lies on the alluvial terrain created by the Sana river and its tributaries on the southwestern hillsides of the Kozara mountain.

Ancient period
Prijedor's history as a fortified population centre can be traced back to the end of the 17th century, but the history of the colonization and surrounding culture is much older. Numerous prehistoric, ancient and medieval archeological sites are evidence of the presence of a variety of different cultures. There are numerous settlements from the prehistoric period, dating back to 2100 B.C., usually associated with burial sites. In the pre-Roman and Roman times the area was settled by a large Illyrian tribe, the Maezaei, a sub-tribe of the Pannonians, renowned for their mining skills. In nearby Ljubija, many Roman monuments have been found that provide evidence of iron production. In Zecovi there is an Illyrian necropolis from the Iron Age. A legend says that the river Sana was named by the Romans.

Ottoman and Austrian Period
Prijedor is mentioned for the first time as a small wooden fort in the list of those places in the Ottoman Empire that were devastated by Croatian troops between 1693 and 1696. In this part of Bosnia a large number of fortifications were constructed in order to protect often contested borders with Austria. Later on, many fortifications were destroyed during the Austro-Ottoman War as the borders moved towards the east and south in favor of Austria. The first mention of the city, being referred to as “Palanka Praedor”, was in a Latin written report of an Austrian field marshal about fortified settlements that were burnt between 1693 and 1696. The term “Palanka” indicates a wooden fortification built on an artificially created island on the river Sana. It is not clear how Prijedor got its name, but there are two theories. One of them refers to the term “prodor” in the local language, meaning penetration, i.e. penetration of the Sana river, which often flooded the entire area. The second theory concerns a race between a man and a horse (a horse is commonly known as “Doro”). It is said that the man reached the finish line before the horse, saying in the local language: “Prije Dore (Before Doro.).".

At the same place in the middle of the 18th century, a new fortress appeared, this time built with stone walls, three towers and two clay causeways for the cannons. Archives from Istanbul dating back to 1745 tells about two town guards crossing over to the newly built Palanka Pridorska Ada (island). It is the first mention of the fortress on the river Sana where the town later developed.

With the emergence of the fortification, the settlement outside of the walls began to develop at the same time. The settlers were probably Christians who lived in the vicinity and whose settlements rapidly merged with the town as it expanded to the north. Attesting to this is an account of an Austrian secret agent about the existence of the town for the purposes of the Austrian army, in which he described the town in detail and especially emphasized the suburbs in its vicinity.

These regions were under Ottoman dominion until 1878.

The town started to develop rapidly thanks to the navigability of the Sana River, the development of trade and crafts, and later the construction of the first railway through Prijedor. The first railroad in Bosnia and Herzegovina was built in 1873 next to Prijedor and went from Dobrljin to Banja Luka. The fortress existed as a military base until 1851 when the army left and the walls were demolished by the local population who used the walls to build their own houses. A huge fire in 1882 destroyed 119 houses, 56 big commercial stores, schools, an Eastern Orthodox church, and 140 families lost roofs over their heads. The next year the Austrian authorities opened a large sawmill at the bottom of the mountain Kozara, which is the first industrial object in the history of Prijedor.

The years after the fire there was intensive development of the town, encompassing both private and state-owned structures. The wood was replaced with modern building materials, the streets were designed at the right angles and the first town plan was created. New buildings were built, such as the Serbian elementary school, a Catholic Church, an Eastern Orthodox Church, and a hotel. The first cultural associations appeared in the town as well as libraries, reading rooms and a printing house. The end of the First World War created a fledgling state—the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes—with Bosnia and Herzegovina as a part of it. Prijedor was an important place as the trade and crafts centre of the whole region. The opening of an iron ore mine in nearby Ljubija in 1916 strengthened the economy of the town. During that period, the mine was one of the biggest and most modern iron ore mines in Europe.

From 1929 to 1941, Prijedor was part of the Vrbas Banovina of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia.

World War II
The memorial centre Mrakovica at Kozara, the work of the academic artist Dušan Džamonja, is dedicated to this region's Yugoslav Partisans and predominantly Serb civilians killed or deported to Ustaše concentration camps during the German-Ustaše-Hungarian Kozara Offensive from June to July 1942, during World War II.

Some villages around Prijedor and Kozara Mountain suffered the deaths of tremendous numbers of civilians, who were killed by the Ustaše and taken to different concentration camps during the genocide campaign; one of these was Jastrebarsko Concentration Camp, where children were imprisoned.

Bosnian war
During the Bosnian War (1992–1995), the area near Prijedor housed the Omarska, Keraterm, and Trnopolje camps established in 1992 for the Bosniak and Croat population.

Education
The first forms of organized education can be traced back to the first half of the 19th century. In 1834 Prijedor had the "Serb elementary school" that later with the so-called "Communal school" was transformed into the "State school" in 1919. One of the earliest and most important educational institutions was the Prijedor Gymnasium, founded in 1923.

Elementary and High schools Nowadays, there are 11 elementary schools with circa 8,000 students and 6 high schools attended by around 4,000 students. A music school and a special school for mentally challenged people are also part of the city educational system.

Colleges and Universities Over the last several years, important steps have been taken, aimed at establishing colleges. As a result, Prijedor now has a University college of Economics and IT, a University College of Medicine, and a mining geology department of the University of Banja Luka. In the northwestern part of the city in the neighborhood of Pećani a Law and Economics faculty is under construction. These are the first steps to establish an independent university centre in Prijedor. Today, Prijedor has around 1300 enrolled students.

Economy

Prijedor is a large service and industrial centre and hosts some of the largest companies in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

It has a developed financial sector; 11 international banks are represented in the city, as well as 5 microfinance organizations and a foundation for development. The city's huge economic potential lies in its strategic geographical location, as it is close to Zagreb, Belgrade, Budapest and Vienna, giving it one of the best climates for economic expansion in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The arable land around the city, raw minerals and growth of the highly educated population in the city proper gives it a unique combination of both being able to produce sophisticated industrial products, and food and service industries.

The following table gives a preview of total number of registered people employed in professional per their core activity (as of 2018):
 * Economic preview

Companies
The city today hosts the Bosnian headquarters of the ArcelorMittal Steel Company, which is the world's largest steel company, with over 320,000 employees in more than 60 countries. Prijedor also contains companies specialized in the chemical industry such as Ferrox A.D., producing iron oxides and pigments. BosnaMontaza A.D., one of Bosnia and Herzegovina's most specialized steel manufacturers, manufactures steel, pipelines, reservoirs, technological equipment, cranes and energy plants.

Other companies such as the Croatian food company Kraš has one of its biggest facilities in Bosnia and Herzegovina in Prijedor, producing confectionery products under the brand names MIRA and Kraš. Brand names such as "Prijedorčanka" are one of the leading producers of the alcoholic beverage Rakija in Bosnia and Herzegovina, placing its products in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia and Croatia.

Celpak Prijedor used to be a big enterprise producing cellulose and paper for export, but has since been shut down.

Agricultural sector
Aside from fishing, Prijedor has a fruit growing industry, gardening industry, agricultural industry, mill and bakery industries, animal husbandry, processing industry, as well as a dairy industry.

Lake Saničani, near Prijedor, is one of the biggest commercial fish farming lakes in Southern Europe. Prijedor city takes up 83,406 hectares (58,450 ha being private property and 24,956 ha state property). Plowed fields and gardens take up 34,026 hectares, orchards 2,386 hectares and vineyards 5,000 hectares. All cultivated soil takes up 40,206 hectares.

Service sector
The service sector in Prijedor is growing rapidly and this is reflected in the growth of hotels, stores, roads, educational facilities and shopping centres that are being built in the city, making it a growing commercial hub in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Transport and aviation
Prijedor has a high standard of roads thanks to the Prijedor Putevi Company and is planning a highway connection to Banja Luka in the east and Sisak to the west to shorten the distance to Zagreb from the Bosanska Krajina region. A so-called "brzi put", i.e. highway is being constructed to connect Prijedor to the Zagreb-Belgrade highway via Bosanska/Kozarska Dubica in the north.

The city is also connected to the rail system in Bosnia and Herzegovina and located on the Zagreb-Sarajevo-Ploče line.

The city has a public transport system with 3 bus lines serving 60 stations in and around the city.

Prijedor also has an airfield in the northeastern part of the city, in the area of Urije. The airfield has a fleet of light aircraft and sailplanes. The airfield also serves as the home of the city's renowned Parachuting Club.

Culture

Prijedor has a various number of galleries, religious sights, libraries, statues, fountains, national monuments, cinemas and a city theater.

Archeological findings
Evidence that Prijedor was settled dates back to 2100 B.C.. Traces of human settlement are evident in the numerous settlements in the region of the present-day city, with necropolises adjacent to the settlements.

Museums
Prijedor is home to the Museum of Kozara founded in 1953, which has a regional status.

It is also home to the local national hero, Dr. Mladen Stojanović. His house has been converted into the Stojanović Memorial House.

At the Kozara National Park, in the vicinity of Prijedor, there is the Mrakovica War Museum. It includes the Second World War photographs, guns and artillery used during the Battle of Kozara.

Theatre
Pozorište Prijedor was founded in 1953, though the tradition of theatre in Prijedor can be dated back to the 19th century. The theatre hosts different plays during the year, starring actors from within and outside of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Besides theatrical plays, the theatre hosts local city choirs that perform regularly.

Religious sites

Prijedor is known for being a multi-religious society, that includes a Catholic church, Eastern Orthodox churches and Mosques. Due to this Prijedor has a large number of mosques in the city centre, one of the oldest dating back to the 16th and 17th century.

The most known is the City mosque "Čaršijska džamija" built in 1750 located on the main street. The mosque includes a library and a school. Mostly all of the city's 33 mosques and the catholic cathedral that were damaged have now been rebuilt.

Other sights are the Eastern Orthodox church "Crkva Svete Trojice" built in 1891, which is surrounded by a wall including a small church park. The catholic cathedral "Sv. Josip" built in 1898 is located in the northern part of the city centre close to the city theatre.

Prijedor used to have a small Jewish population before WWII and the Bosnian war, but nowadays there are no traces of the former Jewish population in the city.

Festivals
The Day of Honey: Locally called "Dani meda". A trade and tourist event where local honey producers from the Prijedor area and beyond gather at the square in the main street to sell and demonstrate their products.

The Prijedor "Summer on the Sana" Festival: "Ljeto na sani". Cultural, artistic and other events along the city river shore.

Writers' Gathering: Each year in September, a cultural gathering "Writers' gathering in Kozara", where works of literature by local authors are presented, takes place.

The Days of Winter: This tourist event is held at the beginning of February in the mountain Kozara. It lasts three days and its main aim is to promote tourist potentials of the Kozara mountain. Sporting and gastronomic competitions followed by a rich entertaining programme are an integral part of this event.

International Chorus Festival – Zlatna Vila: This cultural event is held in The National Theatre of Prijedor every May and it represents a competition in choral singing. Participants of the festival are choirs from different countries both from ex-Yugoslavia and beyond.

St Peter's Day Parachuting Cup: Each year, in the month of July, a sporting event, the St Peter's Day Parachuting Cup, is held. Parachutists from different countries take part in this event, and competitions are organised in various categories: women, men, juniors and teams.

SHA Fest (ŠA Fest): A non profit annual festival of music and arts established to honour the multitalented late artist Dalibor Popović Miksa, which lasts four days. All profit goes to the D.P. Miksa Foundation for the promotion of arts, scholarships and funding of talented artists.

Sports
The local football club, FK Rudar Prijedor, plays in the second tier of Bosnia and Hercegovina, The First League of the Republika Srpska.

Among the oldest sporting clubs in Prijedor is the football club OFK Prijedor founded in 1919. The tennis club of Prijedor was founded by Mladen Stojanović in 1932, though tennis was first played in the city in 1914. Every summer since 1967 the Club organizes tennis tournaments in memory of Dr. Mladen Stojanovic (previously Memorijal, now called Prijedor Open). The Kozara skiing centre is located in Mrakovica. All ski lifts are functional and there is a ski path for children in Mrakovica as well. The skiing centre is inside the Kozara national park and there are several possibilities for mountain house rentals. A renovated hotel with various sports facilities lies close to the ski path.

Other popular sports in Prijedor are basketball and handball. The highest ranked teams are ŽKK Mladost Prijedor, KK Prijedor (Basketball), and RK Prijedor (Handball).

Notable people

 * Mladen Stojanović, leader of Yugoslav Partisans in western Bosnia and a People's Hero of Yugoslavia
 * Nermin Alukić Čerkez, musician, vocalist and guitarist in the well-known Bosnian Sevdalinka band, "Mostar Sevdah Reunion"
 * Zlatan Arnautović, former handball player, Olympic champion
 * Nasko Budimlić, musician, drummer in the Bosnian hard rock band Divlje Jagode
 * Edis Elkasević, Croatian shot putter
 * Nebojša Grahovac, professional handballer
 * Vehid Gunić, journalist and writer
 * Fikret Hodžić, professional bodybuilder
 * Idriz Hošić, football player, European Championship silver medalist
 * Josip Iličić, Slovenian football player
 * Eldin Jakupović, Swiss football player
 * Milja Marin, the subject of the iconic photograph Kozarčanka
 * Dragomir Mršić, Swedish actor
 * Nebojša Popović, handball player, Olympic champion
 * Živko Radišić, politician and former chairman of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina
 * Sreten Stojanović, sculptor
 * Borislav Topić, football player
 * Todor Švrakić, painter
 * Siniša Saničanin professional footballer who plays as for Partizan and the Bosnia and Herzegovina national team

Twin towns – sister cities
Prijedor is twinned with:

 * 🇸🇮 Bovec, Slovenia
 * 🇮🇹 Centro Storico – Piedicastello (Trento), Italy
 * 🇲🇰 Demir Hisar, North Macedonia
 * 🇷🇸 Kikinda, Serbia
 * 🇷🇺 Irkutsk, Russia
 * 🇹🇷 Manisa, Turkey
 * 🇨🇳 Ningbo, China
 * 🇳🇴 Øygarden, Norway
 * 🇷🇸 Pančevo, Serbia
 * 🇸🇮 Velenje, Slovenia

Partnerships

 * 🇸🇮 Novo Mesto, Slovenia

title: Prijedor


text:
Talk:Kabartonjo

I strongly doubt the 'mission' etymology; Rottland (1982) links a related term 'Kamasia' (according to him used as a toponym for the lands of the Tugen) to the Pökoot term /kamâ:s/ 'cool highlands'. — mark ✎ 09:13, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I have updated the article accordingly. — mark ✎ 12:07, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Kabartonjo


text:
Živinice

Živinice is a city located in Tuzla Canton in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, an entity of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is located in northeastern Bosnia and Herzegovina, south of Tuzla. As of 2013, it has a population of 57,765 inhabitants.

History
In the 7th century, Slavic tribes settled permanently in the area of the town of Živinice. The medieval territory of Živinice was part of the Bosnian state, the areas of Gostilj, Dramešin and Soli as independent political units that lost those attributes before the arrival of the Ottomans in Bosnia. The settlement of Živinice as an urban location probably originated in the 18th century.

The municipality of Živinice was formed on 19. June 1959, after a decision by the National Assembly of the People's Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina was passed.

The origin of the name Živinice is still unknown. According to historian Muhamed Hadžijahić Živinice was mentioned in an Ottoman document of 1764 that stated: "Živinice called Uskopči, probably (Oskovci) in nahiya Tuzla".

1991 Census
In the 1991 census, the municipality of Živinice had 54,783 inhabitants, of which there were:
 * 44,017 Bosniaks (80.34%)
 * 3,976 Croats (7.25%)
 * 3,525 Serbs (6.43%)
 * 2,130 Yugoslavs (3.88%)
 * 1,135 others or unknown (2.07%)

The town of Živinice itself had 11,956 residents. By the last documents, Živinice had 12,102 residents.

2013 Census
Source:

Sport

 * NK Slaven Živinice
 * KK Živinice
 * KK Basket Živinice

Local communities
Bašigovci, Barice, Dubrave Donje, Dubrave Gornje, Đurđevik, Gračanica, Kovači, Litve, Lukavica Donja, Lukavica Gornja, Oskova, Priluk, Podgajevi, Rudar, Stari Đurđevik, Suha, Svojat, Šerići, Šišći, Šahići, Tupković, Višća Donja, Višća Gornja, Zelenika, Živinice Gornje, Živinice Centar.

Notable residents

 * Boris Živković, Croatian footballer
 * Dragan Perić, Serbian athlete, World Championships bronze medalist
 * Denijal Pirić, retired footballer
 * Elvir Rahimić, footballer
 * Jasmin Fejzić, football goalkeeper
 * Mirsad Bešlija, footballer
 * Jusuf Nurkić, basketball player
 * Samir Memišević, footballer
 * Adnan Babajić, singer, the winner of the talent show Operacija trijumf

Monuments

 * Statue of Josip Broz Tito
 * Monument to fighters killed in The Bosnian War

Education

 * Živinice has nine elementary schools and two high schools.

title: Živinice


text: User talk:69.197.51.150

title: User talk:69.197.51.150


text:
Laporte rule

The Laporte rule is a rule that explains the intensities of absorption spectra for chemical species. It is a selection rule that rigorously applies to atoms, and to molecules that are centrosymmetric, i.e. with an inversion centre. It states that electronic transitions that conserve parity are forbidden. Thus transitions between two states that are each symmetric with respect to an inversion centre will not be observed. Transitions between states that are antisymmetric with respect to inversion are forbidden as well. In the language of symmetry, g (gerade = even (German)) → g and u (ungerade = odd) → u transitions are forbidden. Allowed transitions must involve a change in parity, either g → u or u → g.

For atoms s and d orbitals are gerade, and p and f orbitals are ungerade. The Laporte rule implies that s to s, p to p, d to d, etc. transitions should not be observed in atoms or centrosymmetric molecules. Practically speaking, only d-d transitions occur in the visible region of the spectrum. The Laporte rule is most commonly discussed in the context of the electronic spectroscopy of transition metal complexes. However, low-intensity f-f transitions in the actinide elements can be observed in the near-infrared region.

Optical properties of transition metal complexes
Octahedral complexes have a center of symmetry and thus should show no d-d bands. In fact, such bands are observed, but are weak, having intensities orders of magnitude weaker than "allowed" bands. The extinction coefficients for d-d bands are in the range 5–200.

The allowedness of d-d bands arises because the centre of symmetry for these chromophores is disrupted for various reasons. The Jahn–Teller effect is one such cause. Complexes are not perfectly symmetric all the time. Transitions that occur as a result of an asymmetrical vibration of a molecule are called vibronic transitions, such as those caused by vibronic coupling. Through such asymmetric vibrations, transitions are weakly allowed.

The Laporte rule is powerful because it applies to complexes that deviate from idealized Oh symmetry. For example, the d-d transitions for [Cr(NH3)5Cl]2+ are weak (ε < 100) even though the complex is only of C4v symmetry.

The Laporte rule helps explain the intense colors often observed for the tetrahedral complexes. The tetrahedral point group lacks the inversion operation, so the Laporte rule does not apply. Illustrative of this effect are the disparate extinction coefficients for octahedral vs tetrahedral complexes of Co(II). For [Co(H2O)6]2+, which is pink, ε ≈ 10. For [CoCl4]2-, which is deep blue, ε ≈ 600.

Note on spin-selection rule
Complementing the Laporte rule, is the spin-selection rule, which forbids transitions that involve changes in spin state. Violations of both the Laporte and spin-selection rules results in particularly low extinction coefficients. Illustrative of this combined effect is the faintness of even concentrated solutions of octahedral Mn(II) and Fe(III) complexes.

History
The rule is named after Otto Laporte who published it in 1925 with William Frederick Meggers.

title: Laporte rule


text: User talk:80.247.158.134

title: User talk:80.247.158.134


text:
Sanski Most

Sanski Most (Сански Мост, ) is a town and municipality located in the Una-Sana Canton of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, an entity of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is situated on the banks of the Sana River in northwestern Bosnia and Herzegovina, in the region of Bosanska Krajina, between Prijedor and Ključ. As of 2013, it has a population of 41,475 inhabitants.

Geography
It is located on the Sana River in Bosanska Krajina, between Prijedor and Ključ. Administratively it is part of the Una-Sana Canton of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Town sits on Nine Rivers, and they are : Sana, Dabar, Zdena, Bliha, Majdanska Rijeka, Japra, Sasinka and Kozica

History
In 1878 the little town (varošica) of Sanski Most was described as Muslim by Croatian historian Vjekoslav Klaić. From 1929 to 1941, Sanski Most was part of the Vrbas Banovina of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia.

During World War II it was part of the Axis Independent State of Croatia (NDH), where the fascist Ustaše regime committed the Genocide of the Serbs and the Holocaust. At the beginning of May 1941 in several villages southeast of Sanski Most (Kijevo, Tramošnja, Kozica, etc.) the first armed conflict between the Ustaše and insurgent Serbs occurred. The event is known as the Đurđevdan uprising. In August 1941 on the Eastern Orthodox Elijah's holy day, who is the patron saint of Bosnia and Herzegovina, between 2,800 and 5,500 Serbs from Sanski Most and the surrounding area were killed and thrown into pits which had been dug by the victims themselves. The State Anti-fascist Council for the National Liberation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (ZAVNOBiH) held its second meeting from 30 June to 2 July 1944 in the town; it declared the equality of Muslims (Bosniaks), Serbs and Croats.

During the Bosnian War, the town was controlled by the Army of Republika Srpska (Bosnian Serbs) and remained under its control until October 1995 when the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina took over it during Operation Sana shortly before the end of the war. The Bosniaks and other non-Serbs were set to large ethnic cleansing during its control by the Army of Republika Srpska (VRS). Many Serbs from Sanski Most and Bosniaks from Prijedor exchanged homes due to their refugee status and the opposing federations.

Vrhpolje Bridge Massacre
On 31 May 1992, the Army of Republika Srpska committed a massacre of 19 Bosniak civilians on the Vrhpolje bridge in Sanski Most municipality. 16 Bosniak civilians were beaten on the bridge whilst the Bosnian Serb soldiers insulted them. 4 had already been murdered by the VRS on the way to the bridge. The Bosnian Serbs had ordered the Bosniak civilians to remove most of their clothes, including their shoes, and then jump off the bridge. The Bosnian Serb soldiers played a game in which they would attempt to shoot the Bosniak civilians mid-air whilst they were falling into the water. There was only one survivor of the massacre, Rajif Begić, who later testified against Ratko Mladić. According to the ICTY trial, Ratko Mladić was responsible for the murder of the Bosniak civilians which the court found was a deliberate attempt to ethnically cleanse the Serb-controlled parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina of their Bosniak population in order to create a homogenously Serb ethno-state. According to Begić's testimony, the VRS had to kill 70 Muslims that day because "seven Serb soldiers had been killed in that area." Branko Basara, the retired commander of the 6th Krajina Brigade was also indicted by the ICTY for war crimes that he committed in the Prijedor and Sanski Most area during 1992. Jadranko Palija, a Bosnian Serb soldier responsible for the massacre, was convicted of war crimes by the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2007.

In 1996, Serb-inhabited Oštra Luka was split from Sanski Most and ceded to the Republika Srpska entity.

Economy
There are several non-governmental organisations in Sanski Most. The Center for Peacebuilding (in the local language "Centar za Izgradnju Mira (CIM)) has been active in the town since 2004. The "Fenix Center" provides humanitarian aid to people in need in the local community. The organisation "Krajiška Suza" provides care in medical, social, psychological, cultural and existential needs of people living in and around Sanski Most. Austrian manufacturer of exhaust pipes Remus has a manufacturing facility in Sanski Most that employs around 300 people. Sanski Most was selected as one of the most successful local communities within the UNDP project that was financed by the Swiss embassy.

Sports
The football club of the town is NK Podgrmeč.

Notable people

 * Mehmed Alagić, general
 * Milan Vukić, chess grandmaster
 * Anna Ibrišagić, Swedish politician
 * Enver Redžić, historian
 * Kemal Malovčić, singer
 * Milenko Zorić, Serbian sprint canoer, silver medalist at the 2016 Summer Olympics, World and European champion
 * Vukašin Brajić, singer
 * Milka Milinković, Paralympic track and field athlete, Croatia's most successful Paralympian

title: Sanski Most


text:
Edenbridge Town railway station

Edenbridge Town railway station is one of two stations serving Edenbridge in Kent, England. The station, and all trains serving it, are operated by Southern, and it is on the Uckfield branch of the Oxted line, from London Bridge.

Facilities
The station has a ticket office which is staffed during Monday-Saturday mornings (06:30-13:05 Mon-Fri, 07:00-13:30 Sat). At other times, the station is unstaffed and tickets can be purchased from the self-service ticket machine at the station.

The station has passenger help points and covered seating areas available on both platforms which are linked by a subway. There are also toilets at the station which are open when the station is staffed. The station has a free car park (operated by Saba Parking) and taxi-rank at its main entrance. There is also a cycle rack at the station entrance.

The London-bound platform is accessible without steps, but the Uckfield-bound platform can be reached only by the stepped subway and so is not accessible.

Services

All services at Edenbridge Town are operated by Southern using DMUs.

The typical off-peak service in trains per hour is: Services increase to 2 tph in each direction during the peak hours. On Sundays, the northbound service runs as far as Oxted only.
 * 1 tph to London Bridge via Oxted
 * 1 tph to Uckfield

Connections
Metrobus routes 231, 233 and 236 serve the station providing connections to Oxted, East Grinstead and Tunbridge Wells.

title: Edenbridge Town railway station


text:
Tešanj

Tešanj is a town and municipality located in the Zenica-Doboj Canton of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, an entity of Bosnia and Herzegovina. As of 2013, the municipality has a population of 43,063 inhabitants, while the town of Tešanj has a population of 5,257 inhabitants. It is situated in the northern part of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Geography
Tešanj is located at an altitude of 230 meters and was built around the river Tešanjka. The town is surrounded by many hills.

History
The present name of the city was mentioned for the first time in 1461 in a charter from King Stephen Tomašević to his uncle Radivoj. The charter stated that King Stephen Tomašević grants him, among other possessions "i na Usori grad Tešanj -- the city of Tešanj, in the Usora region".

Between the second half of the 15th and the first half of the 16th century, the history of Tešanj was rather chaotic. Since Bosnia was a buffer state between the Ottomans and the Hungarians, parts of it changed rulers quite often, alternating between Ottoman and Hungarian occupation. Between 1463 and 1476 Tešanj was the center of the Bosnian Kingdom and the residence of Duke Radivoj Kotromanić.

From 1512 (or 1520-21) onwards, Tešanj was under the continuous rule of the Ottoman Empire. The most influential Ottoman ruler of Tešanj was the Bosnian Sandžak-bey Gazi Ferhad Pasha. It was under his authority that the city rapidly developed. His most significant contribution was the Ferhadija Mosque (1563), which still stands in the old town, dating back to the 16th century. Gazi Ferhad-bey died in 1568 and was buried in the yard of the mosque. The epitaph on his tombstone was in Arabic, and is the oldest Islamic record in Tešanj.

The old Eminagić House is the oldest house in Tešanj, still standing the test of time, and is said to have been built at the end of the 17th century.

The Old Town is dominated by the well-preserved fortress, called "Gradina" or simply Tešanj Castle, that overlooks the entire city. The Upper Town Center expands around the castle, rather than the bottom of it. Very early on this castle became the center of economic and cultural life of Tešanj. It was developed along with retail and trade in Tešanj. The town center developed rapidly in the 17th and 18th century, when there were around 40 stores and workshops operating.

The clock tower was built in the 17th century, standing at 18.5 meters tall. Out of a total of 21 clock towers that were built throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina, this tower is one of four that are still working properly. Up until 1890 this tower had shown alaturca time, but the same year Fehim-beg Smailbegović introduced a new time which showed European time.

The grave of the poet Musa Ćazim Ćatić is located in "Obješenica" cemetery in the town center. Even though he was born in Odžak in 1880, he dedicated his whole life and work to the town of Tešanj, where he died in 1915.

From 1929 to 1941, Tešanj was part of the Vrbas Banovina of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia.

Tešanj Castle
The establishment of this fortification had begun even before the Romans had conquered the region. Exact dates are unknown. It was later enhanced by the Romans, Slavs and the Ottoman forces. It had primarily been a defensive fortification. Tešanj Castle is one of the most significant and biggest castles in Bosnia, with an area of about 6,296 square metres.

During the Ottoman period, the castle had a permanent garrison.

Ethnic composition
The town of Tešanj itself had 5,253 residents in 1981, and 6,058 in 1991. Note: Bosniaks are Bosnian nationals with a Muslim religious and/or cultural background.

Settlements in the municipality
Bukva, Blaževci, Bobare, Cerovac, Čaglici, Čifluk, Dobropolje, Drinčići, Džemilić Planje, Jevadžije, Jelah, Jablanica, Jelah Polje, Kalošević, Karadaglije, Koprivci, Kraševo, Lepenica, Logobare, Lončari, Ljetinić, Marin Han, Mrkotić, Miljanovci, Medakovo, Mekiš, Novo Selo, Novi Miljanovci, Orašje Planje, Piljužići, Potočani, Putešić, Raduša, Rosulje, Ripna, Šije, Tešanj, Trepče, Tešanjka, Tugovići, Vrela, Vukovo, Hrvatinovići, and Dubalji.

Notable people

 * Nisim Albahari (1916-1991), Yugoslav partisan
 * Enis Bešlagić (born 1975), Bosnian actor
 * Musa Ćazim Ćatić (1878-1915), Bosnian poet
 * Alma Hasanić Grizović (born 1989), Bosnian-Norwegian handball player
 * Numan Kurdić (born 1999), Bosnian footballer
 * Otto Lang (1908-2006), Bosnian-American film producer
 * Admir Ljevaković (born 1984), Bosnian footballer
 * Ademaga Mešić (1868-1945), Ustaša Deputy-Leader
 * Jasmin Muharemović (born 1965), Bosnian pop-folk singer
 * Ajdin Mujagić (born 1998), Bosnian footballer
 * Damat Ibrahim Pasha (1517-1601), Ottoman statesman
 * Esad Plavi (born 1965), Bosnian pop-folk singer
 * Sanela Redžić, Bosnian athlete
 * Edin Šaranović (1976-2021), Bosnian footballer
 * Anid Travančić (born 1993), Bosnian footballer
 * Avdija Vršajević (born 1986), Bosnian footballer

title: Tešanj


text:
Talk:Dhu al-Qarnayn

"The story entered the Quran through the Alexander Romance" and scholarly consensus
The lead carries the sentence, "The story entered the Quran through the Alexander Romance...", without qualitification (e.eg., it does not say that this is "according to some modern scholars" etc). The source is Peter G. Bietenholz's "Historia and Fabula: Myths and Legends in Historical Thought from Antiquity ...", page 123 (linked from the bibliography). Bietenholz says of the Alexander story, "from a Syrian version (of the Alexander Romance) it found its way into the Koran." For an in-depth discussion of the standard scholarly understanding, see Z. David Zuwiyya's contribution to the edited volume, "A Companion to Alexander literature in the Middle Ages". This is the consensus, and I don't believe there are any alternative voices. PiCo (talk) 07:02, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

 * Thank you for your feedback and I appreciate the discussion. However, I must respectfully point out that there are alternative voices on the subject- within the article page itself you will find an alternative perspective that contradicts the idea of unanimous consensus. For example, under the People Identified with Dhul Qarnayn section, the following statement can be found: "but some have objected that this cannot be so: Alexander lived only a short time, whereas Dhul-Qarnayn lived for 700 years...Dhul-Qarnayn worshiped only one god, while Alexander worshiped many." and this is cited as source 18 (Van Donzel & Schmidt 2010, p. 57 fn.2.).

 * Further then that, I can provide you with Hadith (Islamic documented narrations) from the companions of Muhammad that claim that Dhul Qarnayn is not synonymous with Alexander the Great, but rather another identity. I can provide those sources here if you would like, but I think the above source shows that alternative voices do exist, and even though the source you mentioned says that it has entered the Quran, other sources concluded differently. For this reason, I must respectfully disagree that there is unanimous consensus that the story of Dhul Qarnayn is derived from Alexander Romance. Nbhard (talk) 08:20, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

 * In their footnote 2 on page 57 Van Donzel and Schmidt are referring to the objections raised by early (and even modern) Islamic commentators - see Zuwiyya for a clearer note on these. On page 57 Van Donzel and Schmidt identify Dhul-Qarnayn with the Alexander of the Syrian Alexander Romance. Muslim commentators operating within a traditional framework are not scholars in the modern sense. Neither, for that matter, are Christian or Jewish exegetes who operate in a traditional framework.PiCo (talk) 10:00, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Reversion of edits of 30/31 January
, I reverted your edits of 30/31 January for the following reasons: The question the article addresses is how the Dhul Qarnayn trope came to be incorporated into the Koran. It gives two answers, the first, in the lead, that it was via the Alexander Romance, the second, in the body, that it was "through legends of Alexander the Great current in the Middle East in the early years of the Christian era." Both are sourced to reliable sources. If you feel that this needs to be amended please let us know how, and from what sources, and how those sources relate to the ones we already use. Thank you. PiCo (talk) 06:53, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The article has been stable for several years, and you are attempting to introduce sweeping changes. You would be better off doing so one piece at a time;
 * You seem to be obsessed with who the "real" Dhul Qarnayn was; this is not a meaningful question, as Dhul Qarnayn is a fictional figure (i.e., there never was a "real" Dhul Qarnayn).

 * A brief look at the article's history shows many reverts about the vague sentence: "The story entered the Quran through a legendary version...". In the reverts you keep claiming that "modern scholarship is pretty unanimous", but your assertion is inaccurate. For instance, the historian Brannon Wheeler, who published detailed works about Dhul-Qarnayn (1998-1/2 & 2002), wrote in his conclusion (1998):

"Q 18:60-65 is not necessarily derived from the Alexander stories. On the contrary, a more discerning examination of the different texts shows that the later recensions of the Alexander stories are dependent upon the Qurʾān as understood through the medium of early Muslim commentaries. Key elements of the later stories, such as the appellation 'Dhu al-Qarnayn' attributed to Alexander owe their origins to the commentaries."

 * This suggests an opposite direction of influence, i.e., elements from Quranic commentaries entered the Alexander stories. There is also some confusion about the dating of the Syriac versions and which key elements appear within which version. Thus the one-sided influence sentence in the lede and its vague "legendary version" and lack of specific elements is not reflective of modern scholarship.

 * I also dispute your second point about the identity of Dhu al-Qarnayn. Other encyclopedia articles often introduce the subject by noting the disagreements over his identity. They also mention why the different figures are linked to specific elements (see Wheeler, 1998, p.199 onward). This is a common "theme" in the cited sources, hence it needs to be summarized here as well. Wiqi(55) 17:22, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

 * As Wheeler states, he's talking about surah 18:60-65, which involves Moses and a fishing trip. In fact Wheeler's article in the Journal of Near Eastern Studies (that's where your quote ultimately comes from) is titled "Moses or Alexander? Early Quranic Exegisis of Quran 18:60-65". He returns to the same ideas in his 2013 book, "Moses in the Qur'an and Islamic Exegesis", which is a more mature consideration of the issues first raised in the article - it's in our bibliography. Moses and the fish is certainly a curious episode, but our article is about Dhul Qarnayn.
 * I think that your blockquote, and perhaps your entire understanding of Wheeler, comes from this website, "Islamic Awareness" - you quote only what's there on the site. Fair enough, but you should say so. And ideally you should read Wheeler.
 * As for the identity of Dhul Qarnayn, I thought I made it clear that we avoid such silly questions. Dhul Qarnayn is fictional, and fictional characters have no identity. To say that the Alexander legends lay behind the Dhul Qarnayn story is a statement of literary influence, not identity.
 * The statement in the lead, "The story entered the Quran through a legendary version of the career of Alexander the Great current in the Middle East", is sourced from Bietenholz, 1994, page 123. I see no reason to change it.PiCo (talk) 01:31, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Pico, Wheeler makes similar arguments for both Dhu al-Qarnayn 18:83-101 and the fish episode 18:60-65. This was in the article before your blanket revert. Here is his argument about the opposite direction of influence:
 * "This suggests that Ibn Hisham's account, coupled with Q 18:83-101, upon which he comments, could represent the immediate source for the stories which attribute these elements to the Alexander stories. These elements originally associated with Sa'b as Dhu al-Qarnayn were incorporated, along with the elements attributed to Dhu al-Qarnayn in Q 18:83-101, into the stories which identified Dhu al-Qarnayn with Alexander."
 * And about the missing key elements:
 * "There are a number of problems with the dating of the Syriac versions and their supposed influence on the Qurʾan and later Alexander stories, not the least of which is the confusion of what has been called the Syriac Pseudo-Callisthenes, the sermon of Jacob of Serugh, and the so-called Syriac Legend of Alexander. Second, the key elements of Q 18:60-65, 18:83-102, and the story of Ibn Hishām's Saʿb dhu al-Qarnayn do not occur in the Syriac Pseudo-Callisthenes."
 * Note that Wheeler links the dating problems and the missing elements to the Syriac Pseudo-Callisthenes, the same version mentioned by Bietenholz.
 * I'm aware that Islamic Awareness has an article on this issue (only read their conclusion; probably where I picked up Wheeler's name), but I'm actually reading Wheeler's book and paper.
 * The debate about his identity is not mainly about the real Dhu al-Qarnayn -- see how Wheeler uses Sa'b account in the quote above. It's all about recognizing key elements in the earliest sources. Calling that silly is just your point of view, and not a compelling argument for removal. Wiqi(55) 08:23, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Your change to the lead would replace this key sentence: The story entered the Quran through a legendary version of the career of Alexander the Great current in the Middle East with this: The majority of traditional and modern scholars have generally endorsed the identification of Dhul-Qarnayn with Alexander the Great, but some early Muslim scholars saw it as a reference to a pre-Islamic monarch from Persia or south Arabia. In short, you want to replace sentence about the literary origins of surah 83:18-101 with something about who Dhul-Qarnayn "really was". He wasn't real at all, he's imaginary. We can talk about where the author of this passage found his material, but it's impossible to talk about the reality of a character who sees the sun set in a pool of mud and builds a wall of iron an copper - it's like asking who Harry Potter really was.
 * In that same sentence you reference "early Muslim scholars". Early Muslim scholars are like early Christian scholars - not terribly reliable. We use modern scholars, and we prefer reliable ones.
 * You want to insert a section on King Ṣaʿb Dhu-Marāthid. He's identical with Abu Nawas, who is already mentioned in the section "People identified with Dhul-Qarnayn" we have three names, one of them "Messiah ben Joseph", a fabulous military saviour expected by Yemenite Jews and associated in folk-lore with Dhu Nawas, a semi-legendary 6th century Yemenite king. Given the extremely few referecnes to this identification, due weight suggests that this is about the right amount of coverage.
 * You want a whole section on Cyrus the Great. This is surely the weakest of all candidates for Dhul-Qarnayn (no one has ever suggested how Cyrus could have gotten into the Quran), and is a very recent invention by Iranian nationalists. It should be mentioned in the same section as Ṣaʿb dhu/Abu Nawas, but only in a single sentence. PiCo (talk) 05:49, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

 * We need more space to summarize the arguments about Sa'b and Cyrus. Also Sa'b is not the same as Dhu Nawas. The Cyrus section should contain both arguments in support and against the Cyrus theory, per Wheeler, as well as its earliest proponents who do not seem to be Iranian nationalists. You misconstrued my edit to the lede sentence. I removed it because it needs to be qualified per Wheeler (dating problems, "supposed influence", missing key elements) and it was inaccurate (Bietenholz refers to the Syriac Pseudo-Callisthenes, not "a legendary version"). Wiqi(55) 08:58, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

 * I don't understand why you're so obsessed with Wheeler - his book got only lukewarm reviews and he definitely isn't the mainstream view. For the rest, I can only repeat that Dhul Qarnayn not only isn't Cyrus, he isn't anyone, he's fictional. PiCo (talk) 09:43, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
 * To clarify, it was his ideas about Moses that were reviewed, since that's what the book is about. He doesn't deny that the DQ story is based on Alexander stories.PiCo (talk) 09:51, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Wheeler (1998&2002) is a reliable source with many paragraphs discussing the Quranic concept of Dhu al-Qarnayn. That's the topic of this article. He is also moving in the right direction as far as modern scholarship is concerned (dating issues; differentiates between the Romance, Legend, Poem, etc; discussion of separate elements). He does deny some elements in the Alexander stories being the earliest source for the DQ story, suggesting a reverse influence of the Quran and Sa'b's account. If you don't mind, and since I can't think of any policy-based concerns to exclude Wheeler, I'll go ahead and add a short summary about Sa'b and Cyrus. Feel free to introduce more sources. Wiqi(55) 20:51, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Pico, Wheeler's summary is on topic here. It can readily be supported by other sources, e.g., the Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature includes a paragraph on the account of Sa'b (citation in article). Your removal of well-cited and on-topic material is not inline with our content policies. If you insist on not working cooperatively then perhaps we should consider a 3rd opinion. Wiqi(55) 16:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Your arguments have not convinced me, nor have mine convinced you. Please take this to dispute resolution if you feel strongly enough. In the meantime, I can only point out that you're trying to introduce a major change to a pretty stable article, and for that you need to convince established editors.PiCo (talk) 20:46, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm just correcting your cherrypicking. You constantly omit the confusion on dating/recension and the key elements found in the Quran but missing from the Syriac Pseudo-Callisthenes. Instead, you cite an exceptional claim by Bietenholz as fact even though its just a one-liner that received no coverage in the literature. Wiqi(55) 12:05, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, even Wheeler agrees with Bietenholz .PiCo (talk) 21:42, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
 * What other source cites Bietenholz's conclusion (to determine wp:weight)? Also, could you quote Wheeler where he agrees with Bietenholz that the origin of the Quranic account is the Syriac Pseudo-Callisthenes? In fact, the Syriac PC is missing most of the key elements of the Quranic account, including the "Dhu al-Qarnayn" appellation. Wiqi(55) 22:27, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Our article does not say that sura 18:83-101 entered the Quran through Psuedo-Callisthenes, it makes a more general claim: "The story [of Dhul Qarnayn] entered the Quran through a legendary version of the career of Alexander the Great current in the Middle East". Bietenholz says: "Around the beginning of the Christian era a version of this tale (i.e., legendary Alexander and his wall) ... appears to have added some lavish detail (to the existing legend or group of legends). It ... seems to have inspired ... Pseudo-Callisthenes ... (and) from a Syrian version it found its way into the Koran." In other words, Bietenholz does not say the DQ story was based directly on PC, but that it "found its way" from "a Syrian version". I believe our wording represents what he says more accurately than would a statement that DQ is based on PC. (We repeat this, with different wordi9ng, in the first line of the subsection "Alexander romance", which is clearly a mistaken header - it's not the AR, a specific text, that's in view, but the more general idea of literary versions of the legendary Alexander)
 * Wheeler wrote an entry on DQ for the 2006 Encyclopedia of the Quran edited by Oliver Leaman, in which he says: "The most popular identification of Dhu al-Qarnayn is with Alexander the Great, and many exegetes relate 18:83-102, and the verses preceding (18:60-82) with episodes from the Alexander Romance literature." This gives us the weight of scholarly opinion and is in agreement with Bietenholz. PiCo (talk) 23:28, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Wheeler is just stating the widely-accepted view about the exegetes, that they used the Alexander Romance to interpret the Quran: "exegetes relate 18:83-102, and the verses preceding (18:60-82) with episodes from the Alexander Romance literature." How can you compare that to "a Syrian version has entered the Quran", which is a claim about the Quran itself? Also, why didn't you quote Bietenholz in full? He refers to a Greek version of PC as the ultimate source for the Syrian version: "From a Greek version of the Alexander legend authored by Pseudo-Callisthenes, the tale of Gog and Magog traveled to Syria, and from a Syrian version it entered the Quran." If not, then which Syrian version is he referring to? His vague sentence is why no one has ever cited him on this issue except you, which makes it an exceptional claim. Wiqi(55) 00:46, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * : If you don't like Bietenholz we can use Wheeler: "The most popular identification of Dhu al-Qarnayn is with Alexander the Great." We still need to say how Alexander got into the Koran, though - but there are plenty of sources for that.PiCo (talk) 01:24, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I prefer Wheeler's statement, which is specific and more widely supported. What other sources make the same claim as Bietenholz? Wiqi(55) 10:50, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * You're using the wrong argument, you should be saying that Bietenholz is writing about the later history of Gog and Magog and that his mention of Dhu l-Qarnayn is only incidental. Which is quite true - his book, after all, is called Historia and Fabula: Myths and Legends in Historical Thought from Antiquity to the Modern Age. Hence the fact that nobody quotes him. Nevertheless, he does sum up the general view on how this story got into the Quran - from one or more of the many legendary tales of Alexander current in the ME around the time it was composed. Even Wheeler doesn't differ - his article and book are about the subsequent, post-Quran, commentaries, and he's saying that these drew on other sources. Just out of curiosity, since you haven't mentioned it, what are your own views (based on those of scholars) on how the story got into Sura 18? Wheeler says nothing about this. Do you have any alternatives? PiCo (talk) 11:16, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

 * I'm just asking for sources to determine weight, which is necessary for the lede. So again, what sources suggest that Bietenholz's view is "the general view on how this story got into the Qur'an"? Also, Wheeler doubts the influence on the Quran citing dating issues and missing motifs (quoted above). My own view is inline with Wheeler. We should also focus on recent and detailed scholarship, not one-liners like Bietenholz's. In recent years, the most widely-cited analysis of the Arabic tradition is by Faustina Doufikar-Aerts of Universiteit Leiden. Ideally, we should summarize her works and introduce others that counter her points (if any). Wiqi(55) 15:28, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

 * Faustina Doufikar-Aerts says that the Dhul Qarnayn story is based on the ALexander story. Which is what Bietenholz says, and what our article says. And, for that matter, what Wheeler says. Can you suggest me someone who says something different? PiCo (talk) 22:28, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Faustina Doufikar-Aerts: "The Afro-Asiatic Alexander cycle started with the translation of the Alexander Romance of Pseudo-Callisthenes into Syriac in around 600 AD..." She then goes on to talk about the later development of the Alexander stories, which is the same ground Wheeler is covering (not how it got into the Quran). Do you know of any place where she says the Dhul Qarnayn story is NOT based on the Alexander cycle?
 * There's Brannon Wheeler - I may have mentioned this - who says that Dhul Qarnayn is "an epithet usually applied to Alexander the Great": this isn't actually what we're after, which is how the story got into the Quran.
 * Kevin van Bladel argues here that the story came from the ALexander Legend rather than the Alexander Romance - "Now that the continuity of tradition between the Syriac Alexander Legend and (the verses on DQ) is established..." Our article just talks about "legends" in general.
 * Look, your website is very good, very well-written, but I think you're a little too close to your own ideas. And we're not trying to say (in our article), who DQ is, but where the Quan story came from - the answer is not any specific literary source, but the whole corpus of legends and stories, as Doufikar-Aerts says. Bietenholz just puts this more succinctly than anyone else.PiCo (talk) 22:58, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Doufikar-Aerts lists three sources for the Afro-Asiatic tradition: Syriac Pseudo-Callisthenes, Christian Syriac Alexander Legend, and the Qur'an. She explicitly notes the confusion about "the origin and the lines of transmission" between these sources:

"'These three seventh-century sources basically formed the pillars of the Afro-Asiatic tradition. [...] Although these sources are still at hand and traceable, there is a lot of confusion concerning their origins and lines of transmission, not to say mystification.'"

She further notes that the Qur'an and the Christian Legend appeared "In the same period" (p. 62). This makes it difficult to accept Van Bladel's hypothesis which assumes a later date for the Qur'an not supported by many. Indeed, Van Bladel is aware of this, as he cites Stephen Gero noting that "since the text [of the Legend] comes from this date (629 CE or later), it cannot be regarded as a source of the Qur’an." (Bladel, p. 190)

You should realize by now that claims about origin and transmission aren't facts, just speculations by some historians. Also please spare us the unsubstantiated accusations; I'm not affiliated with any website. Wiqi(55) 15:57, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

 * I apologise if you were offended by my reference to the website, I actually think it's very well written.
 * On your first point, our article isn't about "the Afro-Asiatic tradition", it's about a few verses in the Quran. The stories about Alexander continued to be elaborated and to multiply for centuries after the Quran appeard - these stories make up the "Afro-Asiatic tradition", and yes, the Quran, after it appeared, fed into them. But our concern here is the sources of the Quran itself.
 * Yes, claims about literary transmission are hypotheses. On Wikipedia we try to represent the balance of scholarly opinion concerning those hypotheses, and it appears, from sources such as we've discussed here, including even Wheeler, that that balance is that the Quranic Dhul-Qarnayn story is based on earlier stories concerning Alexander. If you have any alternatives I'd like to hear of them. PiCo (talk) 04:04, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 * That Wheeler argued for an independent Quran is well attested. Here is the conclusion of chapter 1 of his book:

 * "'It is important to recognize that the details in Q 18:60-101 were such that Muslim exegetes could and did see in them reflections of popular late antique motifs including those related to Biblical contexts. To assume that the Quran intended these associations would be to conflate the Quran with its earliest interpreters, and implicates a number of literary and theological perspectives not always made explicit by those who make the assumption.' (Wheeler 2002, p.33)"

 * Doufikar-Aerts also notes the confusion on origins and transmission of the sources, not the later Afro-Asiatic tradition. She listed the sources separately as the Quran, the Syriac Romance, and the Christian Legend.

 * We should add a line or two explaining the confusion over origin and transmission, hence "according to" statements are necessary.

 * Also consider replacing Bietenholz with another source. His statement that the Gog and Magog tale traveled from the Greek Pseudo-Callisthenes to the Syriac contradicts what other sources are saying. For example:

 * "'The episode of Alexander's building a wall against Gog and Magog, however, is not found in the oldest Greek, Latin, Armenian and Syriac versions of the Romance. Though the Alexander Romance was decisive for the spreading of the new and supernatural image of Alexander the king in East and West, the barrier episode has not its origin in this text. The fusion of the motif of Alexander's barrier with the Biblical tradition of the apocalyptic peoples Gog and Magog appears in fact for the first time in the so called Syriac Alexander Legend. This text is a short appendix attached to the Syriac manuscripts of the Alexander Romance.' (, p. 17)"
 * Edit: signing. Wiqi(55)
 * I don't know why we keep having to go over this. Our article does not say that DQ entered the Quran from Pseudo-Callisthenes, and nor does Bietenholz - he says that Pseudo-Calisthenes authored a version of the Alexander legend (and not the Alexander Legend), and from a Syrian version (of the legend, not of Pseudo-Callisthenes) it entered the Quran. Elsewhere we have your statement that the wall motif comes from the Alexander Lengend and not from Pseudo-Callisthenes. Our article covers that. The other sources you mention are rather vague about how AG got into the Quran, which is why Bietenholz is our best source - he doesn't contradict them, though, and they don't contradict him. And no, the Quran was not revealed to Mohammed by Allah. PiCo (talk) 11:29, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Bietenholz repeats a a misconception about the Gog and Magog story: "From the Greek version of the Alexander legend authored by Pseudo-Callisthenes, the tale of Gog and Magog travelled to Syria". That's an error on his part. More recent sources state the opposite, i.e., the story traveled from Syriac to Greek: "the motif of Alexander's barrier with the Biblical tradition of the apocalyptic peoples Gog and Magog appears in fact for the first time in the so called Syriac Alexander Legend". Clearly Bietenholz is a bad source for issues of origin. This is a good enough reason to ignore Bietenholz, which is also not cited by anyone except you. For why the origin claim is subjective, see the quotes above by Wheeler, Doufikar-Aerts, and Stephen Gero. And take heed of wp:assert. Wiqi(55) 20:26, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Let's seek a third opinion
. This discussion is just going round in circles. I strongly suggest we get a third |third opinion, which is a dispute settlement (or at least management) procedure]. When you read the page you'll see that it's recommended that the approach be opened by both parties. If you agree with this you can either open it yourself or advise me here that you'd like us both to open it. PiCo (talk) 11:43, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

 * Sure, I have suggested a 3rd opinion before. However, after realizing how outdated and confused Bietenholz is, I now think it would be best if you try to familiarize yourself with our content policies, namely wp:assert and wp:redflag. Wiqi(55) 20:29, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

 * If you refuse 3O we'll have to try a different (more confrontational) dispute resolution route. Please reconsider 3O.PiCo (talk) 23:50, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

 * Where have I refused 3O? You can go ahead and ask for 3O if you want. But you can't remove sourced content without discussion and without citing any policies. You also did not reply to my concerns about Bietenholz above. Wiqi(55) 18:20, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

are you seeking a third opinion that agrees or disagrees with you? JorgeLaArdilla (talk) 08:25, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Stop nuisance editing
Gog and Magog first appear in the 2nd temple period (first few centuries before Christ) - before that, in Ezekiel, it's Gog from Magog, a person and a place. The wall appears in the Hellenistic period, in connection with Alexander. They come together in a whole set of written legends from that period, and then into the Quran. To put it very simply, your proposal fails to identify the literary origins of the Dhul Qarnayn story, Bietenholz does and is a reliable source, he isn't contradicted (and is in fact supported) by every single source you've mentioned, and you've never given a good reason for rejecting this. Please stop this nonsense.PiCo (talk) 11:04, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

 * As exaplined in the sources cited above, the Hellenistic stories do not link Alexander with an eschatological barrier involving Gog and Magog. That motif first appeared in the Syriac and Quranic accounts. Besides, Bietenholz explicitly mentions the Greek P-C as a source for the tale of Gog and Magog: "From the Greek version of the Alexander legend authored by Pseudo-Callisthenes, the tale of Gog and Magog travelled to Syria". That turned out to be an error. Since you also assert that Wheeler and Stephen Gero supports Bietenholz on the Syriac origin of the Quran, contrary to what I quoted above, then why don't you quote them directly? I asked you many times to quote Wheeler and you have failed to do so. I hope you're not creating new sections just to avoid addressing that question. Also, recent scholarship point out that the "two-horned" appellation first occurred in the Quran. In other words, an important motif in the Quranic account is not found in any Greek or Syriac legend. Why do you keep removing that sourced info? Wiqi(55) 13:43, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

A New Theory on Dhul-Qarnayn
Significant and valuable researches in the field of Iranian mythology, about Jam specially, have been accomplished in recent years. Every researcher has seen to one or a few characteristic(s) of this polyhedral character from a point of view. One of the unanswered questions about Jam is the two instruments which Ahura Mazda gave to him to spread and develop of material world. In this article, it is tried to show the reality of these two by documentary reasons; and it is displayed some other unknown phases of this wonderful character through it. Mentioning the notices that are stated about Dhul-Qarnayn in holy Koran, I show similarities Jam and Dhul-Qarnayn, and on the basis of it I propose theory of oneness of these two. Proving that Dhul-Qarnayn is the same Indo-Iranian Jam, it could be said that Jam had been a historical character. This article has been written in Persian, by thtle of "Who is Jam?" (جم کیست؟)

http://aclr.ir/?page_id=288

∫∨∧∫ — Preceding unsigned comment added by MNF6161 (talk • contribs) 14:05, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Why was my edit deleted?
I have given a detailed quote from a valid date that editor2020 user deleted and I don't know what the reason is. Reza235 (talk) 02:54, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
 * If you know who the editor was, then you know how to access the edit history, where you can see that Editor2020 said "needs references."
 * If you don't understand what a reference is, you should start with this simple tutorial before you try editing an article. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:06, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

@Ian.thomson I didn't add any articles or articles I just added in the see also section of Cyrus the Great in the Qur'an because on the same page Cyrus the Great was mentioned in addition to Alexander Reza235 (talk) 10:11, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It is your responsibility for you to cite sources for *ANYTHING* you add to articles. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:14, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Please explain why my edit was removed from Zul Qarnain? Are you a racist and don't want the name of Cyrus the Great in Zul Qarn? I didn't make any major edits, I just added the name of Cyrus the Great to Alexander because in Wikipedia he speaks of Cyrus separately from Alexander, so if you don't allow Cyrus to remain a name, I say you're racist. Thanks Reza235 (talk) 09:53, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * To be as clear as possible, since you obviously didn't pick it up beforehand: you must cite sources when you add any claim. You did not cite sources.  That was literally the only problem.  If you cannot assume any good faith from other editors, then we will have to assume you're not here to cooperatively work on a collaborative project with other users. If you make another personal attack toward other editors without even attempting a civil conversation beforehand, we may have to assume you are incapable of doing so.
 * The course of action you need to take now is looking for sources, or asking how to look for sources or cite sources. There is nothing worth defending in your post beyond the (already noted) suggestion of expanding the material on Cyrus the Great.  Ian.thomson (talk) 10:11, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

 * My source is Wikipedia. I also see the page of Cyrus the Great in the Koran in Wikipedia itself. Cyrus the Great Page in the Qur'an is available on Wikipedia, now let me add the Cyrus the Great page in Wikipedia?  Because I just added the Cyrus the Great page on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reza235 (talk • contribs)
 * That you're citing Wikipedia is further evidence you just need to stop until you've completed this tutorial. Wikipedia is not accepted as a reliable source on Wikipedia. Seriously, just stop until you've taken the tutorial, you're only making yourself look bad.  Ian.thomson (talk) 13:03, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

 * Regarding specifically the See also link at the top:
 * While arguably it is true that according to Wikipedia standards the Cyrus theory is comparatively not as well-established - since Western academics have written in favour of only the Alexander theory (afaik) - having only the Alexander theory mentioned at the very top of the page appears a little POV. I suggest either removing the "See also" part entirely or to include links to both theories. If no one disagrees, I'll move forward on this. — AhmadF.Cheema (talk) 08:02, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

What is the reason for the removal of Cyrus the Great?
Why did you remove the leaf of Cyrus the Great in Zul Qarnain while I hadn't added it and had the source? I looked at it a week ago and the Cyrus section was great, but now my request has been deleted while it had the source part and I didn't add it. This section had the source. Until a week or so ago, Cyrus the Great was in Zul Qarn, but not now Reza235 (talk) 11:59, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

 * Reasons for recent edits:
 * Lede: The "destruction by God in a single night" part isn't supported by the verses quoted in the citation (Qur'an 21:96). A careful reading of the citation shows that the author also didn't claim such. This part apparently, is actually from apocalyptic writings outside of the Qur'an. Correcting possible POV issues. Re-including balancing information previously added by 77.16.54.108, but unjustly removed (ironically by someone who supports the same understanding).
 * Specifically naming Ernst: Interpretation of relevant verses so as to mean the sun actually setting in a "muddy spring" and the "live so close to the rising sun that they have no protection from its heat" part isn't universally accepted. Furthermore, the part - Quran changes this into a general administration of justice - something along those lines isn't even mentioned in the cited verses. The exegeses by Mufti Muhammad Shafi Usmani (p. 653) and Maududi also don't support these. On a side-note, the interpretation of sababa as "celestial 'pathways'" (argued by Ernst but unused in the article) is also unsupported by the mentioned exegeses.
 * Including everyone under #People identified as Dhul-Qarnayn appears more balanced.
 * Re-including the unjustly removed #See also links.
 * — AhmadF.Cheema (talk) 20:11, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Edit summary mistakenly included Special:Diff/925013307 should've been Special:Diff/925245105.
 * — AhmadF.Cheema (talk) 20:17, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Valid sources indicate that Cyrus is the same as Dhul-Qarnayn
I have made a promise and cited sources indicating that Cyrus the Great is the same as Zul Qarn, so I urge you to revert to the previous edition that deleted Cyrus the Great from Zul Qarnain in English because the sources are credible, now that the sources Valid Please return the name of Cyrus to the English language page. Zulqarnain in connection with Cyrus the Great because you deleted the name of Cyrus the Great from Zulqarnain page because it had no credible source

Azad, Abul Kalam (1990). India's Maulana Abul Kalam Azad. Indian Council for Cultural Relations.

Ball, Warwick (2002). Rome in the East: The Transformation of an Empire. Routledge. ISBN 9781134823871.

Berberian, Manuel (2014). Earthquakes and Coseismic Surface Faulting on the Iranian Plateau. Elsevier. ISBN 978-0444632975.

Bietenholz, Peter G. (1994). Historia and fabula: myths and legends in historical thought from antiquity to the modern age. Brill. ISBN 978-9004100633.

Cook, David (2005). Contemporary Muslim Apocalyptic Literature. Syracuse University Press. ISBN 9780815630586.

Wasserstrom, Steven M. (2014). Between Muslim and Jew: The Problem of Symbiosis Under Early Islam. Princeton University Press. ISBN 9781400864133.

Wheeler, Brannon M. (2013). Moses in the Qur'an and Islamic Exegesis. Routledge. ISBN 9781136128905.

Muhammad Husayn Tabatabai Al-Mizan fi Tafsir al-Qur'an (Tafsir al-Mizan was translated into English by author and renowned Shia preacher Syed Saeed Akhtar Rizvi)

Authentic Persian Resources

پورپیران، عباس (دی ۱۳۸۴)، «نگرشی بر مقدمه کوروش کبیر (ذوالقرنین)»، مجله گزارش (۱۷۰)

یزدان‌پرست، حمید (۱۳۸۶)، ««ذوالقرنین» یا «کوروش» در متون مذهبی (۲)»، مجله گزارش (۲۴۳ و ۲۴۴)

ذوالقرنین یا کوروش در متون اسلامی، مجله دریای پارس

کوروش کبیر یا ذوالقرنین، ابوالکلام آزاد ترجمه و مقدمه: دکتر محمدابراهیم باستانی پاریزی، نشر کورش، تهران ۱۳۷۵

Authentic Arabic sources

کتاب شناخت: کوروش کبیر، نوشته نویسنده عرب صابر صالح زغلول کورش الأکبر «مؤسس الدولة الفارسیة وأبو إیران؛ حیاته و فتوحاته وهل هو ذوالقرنین»

الاسرائیلیات و الموضوعات فی کتب التفاسیر قدیما و حدیثا تألیف سید یوسف محمود ابو عزیز، ص: ۲۵۶ حدیث نبوی کوروس ملک فارس Reza235 (talk) 05:42, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

 * Regarding Muslim sources favouring the Cyrus theory, you can also use the "Muslim scholarship against Alexander theory" at the end of #Opinions of "tiny minorities".
 * With-respect-to the Western sources you've quoted above, what exactly do they support? Do they support Dhul-Qarnayn is Cyrus theory? The Warwick one that I checked doesn't appear to be doing so. Quoting the text or referencing the page number would help.
 * Update: Looking at 's edit, although I don't agree with the interpretation of Wheeler's writing, it would appear those Western sources do not support your edits. Is this true? If so, these are irrelevant to the present discussion.
 * — AhmadF.Cheema (talk) 08:46, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * — AhmadF.Cheema (talk) 08:46, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

The obsession against Muslim "scholars"
In the talk page of the related article, Alexander the Great in the Quran, I pointed out how Muslim intellectuals are conveniently cherry-picked as scholars when they support the editor's position, otherwise have themselves degraded to something like mere clerics.

 * 'Why the use of the term 'clerics' for these scholars? Their own Wikipedia pages define them as scholars. The IP [editor] incrementally degraded them from 'traditional Islamic version of scholarship' to 'traditional Muslim teachers' and then finally to just 'Muslim clerics'. Furthermore, in the very same lede, when support for Alexander theory is cited, Muslims are termed as 'commentators', but when opinion opposes this theory, they become simple 'clerics'."

The same thing appears to have happened yet again. Maududi is now forced into the "philosopher" term. "Philosopher" is normally fine, but not when it is being used to degrade the significance or credentials of the person. Maududi is defined as a "scholar" by reputable sources. Furthermore, at the end of section #Opinions of "tiny minorities", I pointed out over a dozen other Muslim scholars against the Alexander theory.

Regarding the Reeves citation, since a significant number of Muslim "scholars" are clearly not in agreement, the unqualified "consensus of scholars" is inaccurate. Either qualify these scholars specifically as "Western scholars" (even Reeves appears to be referring only to Western scholars) or revert to the previous wording of "has most popularly been identified as" which is more accurate. In the absence of a response, I think I should revert this edit.

— AhmadF.Cheema (talk) 09:20, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Lead
In general I think it's a good idea to more briefly mention that differing views exist here, and leave the who-says-what for the body. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:14, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

 * That paragraph was primarily authored by me. Maududi's name was included because of this discussion. Regarding the other two, I don't know how to phrase the paragraph without mentioning the names. Can't say "some scholars say such and such" as these two individuals might be the only ones mentioning this.

 * Regarding the brief introduction of these two people (Bietenholz and Wheeler), how about leaving the names in the lede as is, without mentioning who they are; and when their names are mentioned later in the article, their credentials can be noted there?
 * — AhmadF.Cheema (talk) 20:55, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

 * Regarding the statement you included: "In modern times, the identification of Dhu al-Qarnayn with Alexander remains the most popular..." - It appears a bit unclear whether Reeves is referring towards only Western scholarship or he is including Muslim too. If Muslims are included, then this is demonstrably false as in Talk:Alexander the Great in the Quran, I noted over a dozen modern highly influential Muslim scholars who pretty much out-rightly reject the Alexander theory. If Reeves' sentence is limited to only Western scholarship, then this qualification should be pointed out in the lede. — AhmadF.Cheema (talk) 14:07, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

 * That's a valid point. I think it's better to remove that sentence for now, pending additional discussion/sources. We lack a complete survey, and recent scholarship now focus on origin and transmission of individual motifs rather than the identity question. Wiqi(55) 22:29, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Edit war resolution
please stop edit warring and discuss your differences here to resolve the case. Ahendra (talk) 06:40, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * How is one edit since December 2020 editwarring? Why me and not User:Anachronist and User:Wiqi55? Doug Weller  talk 11:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Simply because i only see the recent editors which i think i can reach by talking.Ahendra (talk) 12:23, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * That reasoning makes no sense; the article history is plain to see. The only person edit-warring has already been blocked. That person needs to get consensus after the block expires. I'm happy to participate in that discussion if and when it happens. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:18, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * sure, its just an eyesore to see how much reverts of this page in single day alone, glad it resolved.Ahendra (talk) 15:25, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I saw this and I thought I'd add a reliable source or two. Doing that I may have reinforced the bad turn taken in the lead (early Muslims – modern scholars – some modern Muslims – modern scholars and early Muslims all over again) by the recent editor, so feel free to reorder/rewrite. ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 01:15, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

the "commentators" you want to refer to are modern Muslim scholars, and I do not understand why you object to that phrasing. Could you please explain why you prefer it, beyond the fact that it's the exact word used by the source (Abul A'la Maududi)? Also, could you cite a number of reliable sources which use the spelling "Dhul Qarnayn"? Thanks! ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 02:42, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

 * The citation states commentators. Changing it to “Muslims scholars” is not backed by the source. Not only that, commentators (in Arabic “mufassireen”) isn’t synonymous with the term “Muslim scholars”. Stick to what the source says and be fair. Further, Al-Maududi is already mentioned in the page concerning Cyrus. No need for repetition. It would be like repeating those who believed it was Alexander. It’s already on the page. And I added the name “Dhul Qarnayn” because from what I’ve seen on the internet it seems to be a very popular spelling of the word. Where are your citations for the other spellings? 👍 Loverofediting (talk) 03:00, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

 * thanks for replying here! The problem is that it is not clear what the word "commentators" refers to in our context. I agree that Maududi is talking about mufassirun or Quran commentators. But it's also obvious, and this is important, that he is talking about other modern Quran commentators like himself ("now the commentators are inclined to believe [...]", emphasis added). So what about While some modern Quran commentators such as Abul A'la Maududi are in favor [...]? I feel it's important to specify that it's Maududi who holds this opinion, because it's a minority opinion, so people will want to know who precisely holds it.
 * The spelling "Dhu al-Qarnayn" is used, among others, by Cook 2013 (see the 'Sources' section, quoted in what is now note 9). But the WP:BURDEN to cite reliable sources is on the editor who wants to add content. So please give us specific sources for the Dhul Qarnayn spelling. Thanks! ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 03:19, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Actually, "While some modern Muslim commentators ..." does remain the best option given the fact that the WP:LEAD summarizes the article, and that the Dhu al-Qarnayn section covers the fact that according to reliable, secondary sources, multiple modern Muslim scholars have defended that interpretation. ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 09:50, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Lead: the Cyrus the Great hypothesis adopted by Muslim scholars
The relevant section of the article documents at some length that the theory that Dhu al-Qarnayn referred to Cyrus the Great, though first proposed by the German philologist Redslob, was adopted by a number of modern Muslim scholars. The lead summarizes the article, so there is no reason to remove the word "Muslim" from it. ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 09:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Artaxor
With regard to the content I removed here: we need a secondary source making the inference that the Artaxor on the map may refer to Cyrus the Great. The Shahnameh is a primary source and should not be used by Wikipedia-editors for this type of thing: that would be original research, which we leave to trained researches and do not carry out ourselves. Thanks, ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 14:06, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

 * it's been reinstated. JOHANN SCHÖNER'S GLOBE OF 1515: Transcription and Study does say taxor rex collexit de omnibus partibus persarum; and the second: Provincia gog in qua fuerunt iudei inclusi tempore artaxorsis régis persaru which means "The taxor, the king, collected from all parts of Persia; and the second: The province of gog in which the Jews were confined in the time of Artaxorsus, king of Persia". That's a transcription by Nordenskiöld. The other Van Duzer source (the first one) adds nothing to that. Nordenskiöld himself says "Mag°g, in these two are races big as giants, full of evil manners, Jews whom King Artaxor collected from all parts. Province of Gog, in which the Jews were confined in the time of Artaxor, King of Persia..  Doug Weller  talk 17:29, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

 * I looked a bit into this and found the following: according to Andrew Gow, who writing in the Journal of Early Modern History (here, pp. 77-78) quotes the Provincia gog, in qua fuerunt iudei inclusi tempore artaxersis regis persarum line from the Borgia map (c. 1430), Artaxersis refers to the Artaxerxes mentioned in the Book of Ezra 7 (here, either Artaxerxes I or Artaxerxes II), whom he says was commonly confused in Medieval Europe with the Neo-Assyrian king Shalmaneser V (2 Kings 17, here) as the king who drove the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel into exile. This is based on the identification of Gog and Magog with the lost Jewish tribes, a topos that may go back to the 12th century and that was especially popular in 13th-15th century Europe. I added this info to the Gog and Magog article.
 * There is no reason to suppose that these late medieval Bible-based speculations had anything to do with the Islamic Dhu al-Qarnayn narratives, and in any case we have no sources making such a connection. We should therefore remove it. is there any reason why we should not? @other editors: please briefly confirm here if you think it should be removed. Thanks, ☿  Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 21:12, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

 * Dear and, In the method of historical studies, which is related to ancient history, they do not remove the evidence. Because a symmetry can clearly show the background of an idea. Here we have a historical document that shows the connection between the Achaemenid kings of Persia and the imprisonment of Gog and Magog. Deleting this evidence (and removing its citations from Wikipedia) will only help make the wiki more biased (not more free). Please note that Artaxor is not same as Artaxerxes (i.e.: David is not same as Davidson). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bashir Iran (talk • contribs)

 * You don't understand how Wikipedia works. "Symmeetry" would need to have sources meeting WP:RS discussing such symmetry, otherwise it is original research and is absolutely not allowed. I agree with what User:Apaugasma says above, we should remove that material. Doug Weller  talk 09:04, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 May 2022
Majority of scholars don't support Alexander being him because Alexander was a pagan. This is basic knowledge. 94.110.167.88 (talk) 12:01, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Terasail [✉] 12:05, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Reliable sources are common sense — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.110.167.88 (talk) 12:07, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

i think it needs some modern basely islamic source (shia specialiy) not the europian sources about islam
titles says. also this comment (Majority of scholars don't support Alexander being him because Alexander was a pagan. This is basic knowledge) is true too. 5.62.168.102 (talk) 10:06, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

April 2024 edits
I made changes in the article after going through the hundreds of edits since 2021, which included dozens of changes from banned sock puppet accounts. Tried to make sure none of the citations or the content got removed, only paraphrased and moved.

 * Lede

 * Changed the lede after comparing the versions from 2019, 2020, and the present March 2024 one.
 * The "majority of modern scholars and Islamic commentators" phrasing gives undue weight, since over a dozen medieval and modern Muslim scholars and some Western researchers have been noted to have rejected the Alexander identification. On the other hand, the original phrasing from 2019, "most popularly been identified", is more appropriate and furthermore fits the citation better too.
 * The Syriac Alexander Legend portion is somewhat complicated due to it being disputed, and therefore may be more appropriate in the detailed Alexander section below. Not sure about this, though.
 * Added the Wheeler citation with quote, but it may require further trimming.

 * This section removal was mistaken. Part of the content may have been from a banned user, but that section overall had been part of this article for a long time, which was also partly edited by Doug Weller. No need to make the two quotes block-quote again, since this content is not significant enough.

 * Previous lede survives till December 2021.
 * Disruptive edits begin in January 2022 by User:Loverofediting – who gets blocked twice for disruptive editing and edit warring, and then indefinitely for Sockpuppetry.
 * Loverofediting obliterates specifically that portion of the cited lede which suggests Dhu al-Qarnayn's identification with anyone other than Alexander the Great, even an important citation that is referenced later on. This edit was clearly to force an agenda. Loverofediting continues on with this, making small changes to enforce this, qualifying the opponents of this theory and simply changing "many Muslim scholars" to just "some Muslim scholars".
 * The changes get reverted but Loverofediting undoes it. Going on to actually reference a children's book, My Little Lore of Light, to support their viewpoint.
 * Changes get reverted back to original again, but Loverofediting undoes that again too. They are told to take these changes to the talk page, but the same cycle repeats once more, and again. At which point, Loverofediting gets blocked for 48 hours and things temporarily calm down.
 * Then, after the expiration of the block, there is the demoting of "Muslim scholars" into just some "commentators". All this is a fair bit similar to another edit warring instance from summer of 2019 on a related article. There, I had also documented about a dozen modern Muslim scholars who have supported the Cyrus identification theory.
 * Loverofediting returns to the page after two weeks and there is a bit more edit warring, though this time it is not really in support of their agenda.
 * Wrong removal related to Gog and Magog, the source can be checked, it is just in a non-English language.

 * User:Ziggy Wiggy Figgy removed the Cyrus identification from the lede claiming that "it’s only the view of one person (Al-Maududi) and nobody else" which is objectively false. Even the Cyrus the Great section underneath contradicts this claim. This edit became unsurprising when it turned out that this was a sock puppet of User:Loverofediting.
 * Two more sock puppets of Loverofediting become involved, User:CoolHistory757 in December 2023 (which leads to page protection for a year) and User:GlobalEdit1617 in January 2024.

AhmadF.Cheema (talk) 14:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 April 2024
I am a native Arabic speaker, following the section with Surat-Al-Kahf the meanings of the word "qarn" which is italicized are discussed, however, there is an error in that it is written as "qam" and not "qarn". Please fix it for clarity.

Change {The Arabian word qam means both "horn" and “period” or “century”.} to {The Arabian word qarn means both "horn" and “period” or “century”.} NiceCrispyBac0n (talk) 11:29, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ Charliehdb (talk) 12:51, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dhu al-Qarnayn


text:
Danson Park

Danson Park is a public park in the London Borough of Bexley, South East London, located between Welling and Bexleyheath. At 75 hectares, it is the second largest public park in the borough (the largest being Foots Cray Meadows at 100 hectares), and the most used by the community. Opened in 1925, it is often considered the finest green open space in the borough, and is Grade II listed on the Register of Historic Parks and Gardens. The park also gives its name to the electoral ward that covers the park and the surrounding area. The park is located at. The southern boundary of both the park and the ward is delineated by Rochester Way, the A2 road.

History
The area now occupied by the park had previously been part of the church and then crown estates, before being occupied by John Styleman and then Sir John Boyd, 1st Baronet, both senior figures in the British East India Company. In the 1760s, Boyd built Danson House, a Grade I-listed Georgian mansion that stands in the centre of the park, and commissioned much of the landscaping that can be seen in the park today. The landscape was designed and laid out between 1761 and 1763, by either Capability Brown or his assistant Nathaniel Richmond. At its centre is a large and picturesque 12-acre (49,000 m2) lake, described by Edward Hasted in his History and Topographical Survey of the County of Kent of 1797 as "a most magnificent sheet of water so contrived as to seem a beautiful serpentine river, flowing through the grounds". A small house with a spire, named Chapel House, was constructed to the south of the lake, which is now separated from the rest of the park by a motorway, but can still be seen today near the roundabout at Blendon. By the time of Boyd's death the Danson Estates comprised over 600 acres (2.4 km2) of pleasure grounds and agricultural estate.

In 1773, a mock ancient Greek temple was built near to the lake by Sir William Chambers. This was disassembled and moved to the gardens of St Paul's Walden Bury in Hertfordshire in 1961, and is today a grade II listed building. There was also a statue of the Roman goddess Diana in the park.

The other key previous occupant of the estates was Alfred Bean, a railway engineer who bought the property in 1862. Bean was the driving force behind the Bexleyheath Railway Company, and chairman of Bexley Local Board, and envisaged transforming the now 582-acre (2.4 km2) estate into a residential suburb. Outlying areas were sold off for residential development according to Bean's will, but the house and 224 acres of the estate remained in Bean's family after his death in 1890. On the death of his widow in 1921, when it was auctioned, and eventually acquired by Bexley Urban District Council (UDC) for £16,000 in 1924. The council spent another £3,500 converting the estate into a public park.

The park was opened to the public in 1925 by Princess Mary, Land was reserved for football pitches, tennis courts and a bowling green, which have been added over time. In 1929 the Morris Wheeler Gates were erected at the north-east corner of the park, donated by Alfred Morris Wheeler, a prominent local businessman and chairman of Bexley UDC. An open-air swimming pool opened in 1936, and in 1964 the Boathouse and Cafe opened to the public. The park grounds were restored, funded by the Heritage Lottery Fund, in 2006, alongside a major English Heritage restoration of Danson House. The park is now used extensively by the community.

Features of the park
The one hectare Danson Park Bog Garden is a Local Nature Reserve. There are also three gardens open to the public: the English Garden, located over the road from Danson House; the Rock Garden, at the western end of the park; and the Peace Garden in the south-eastern corner.

On 30 September 1937, Lord Cornwallis presented the charter re-designating Bexley from an Urban District Council to a municipal borough under the large oak tree in the centre of Danson Park. The oak tree, which is over 200 years old, has since been known as "Charter Oak", and has been recognised as one of the Great Trees of London. It is a central feature of the park, and is also featured on the London Borough of Bexley coat of arms. The tree is now enclosed to protect its root system.

The park regularly hosts circuses, fun-fairs, firework displays, and various other large public events. A free 5k run, part of the international parkrun events, takes place every Saturday morning at 9.00am on a two-lap scenic course around Danson Lake. Sports facilities in the park include football pitches, hard-surface tennis courts, bowling greens, obstacle courses, an outdoor gym and cycle routes, as well as a popular children's playground with a small water park. Boating, sailing and rowing are possible on the lake, also used by various water-sports clubs and societies.

The park contains the Danson Stables, a public house in a building previously used as the stable block for Danson House, and The Boathouse, a function suite and restaurant near the lake.

Danson Festival
Until 2013 the park played host to the Danson Festival, an annual large-scale two-day event run by Bexley Council, which attracted up to 60,000 visitors to the park. The festival included many stalls such as arts, crafts, charities and others, as well as a fun fair with various rides. The festival usually ran on the first weekend of July each year. The main focal point of the festival was the main stage on which various local artists performed, alongside established acts. Past festivals featured performances from artists including The Hoosiers, The AllStars with Jocelyn Brown, Alexander O'Neal, X-factor's Rowetta, and Peter Andre and Katie Price.

In 2014 the festival was cancelled due to poor condition of the grounds. The council cancelled the festival again in 2015 for the same reason, with the suggestion that the measure could be permanent, and the festival has not taken place since.

Local government ward
Danson Park was a ward of the London Borough of Bexley. The population of this ward at the 2011 Census was 10,864. In the council elections of 2014, Danson Park ward returned Linda Bailey, Sharon Massey and John Waters as councillors, all from the Conservative Party. In 2017 the Danson Park ward was abolished, and the park is now in the Falconwood and Welling ward.

title: Danson Park


text:
William Bowes (MP for County Durham)

Sir William Bowes (6 January 1657 – 16 January 1707) was a British landowner and M.P.

Sir William Bowes Kt. of Streatlam Castle was educated at Trinity College, Cambridge. He was one of the two Members of Parliament for County Durham during the second, third and fourth Parliaments of Charles II, and then again in the second Parliament of William III and first and second Parliaments of Queen Anne. His son George Bowes, later represented the County. Sir William married Elizabeth Blakiston of Gibside on 17 August 1691. She was the daughter of Sir Francis Blakiston and Ann Bowes who was the  great granddaughter of Sir George Bowes of Bradley Hall. From this marriage came much of the wealth of the Bowes (later Bowes-Lyon) family as the Gibside estates lay over rich coal seams. The children of Sir William and Lady Bowes were William Blakiston, Thomas (d. 1722), George, Anne, Elizabeth, Jane and Margaret. George's daughter (Sir William's granddaughter) was Mary Eleanor Bowes (1745–1800) – in her day considered to be the "wealthiest woman in Europe".

title: William Bowes (MP for County Durham)


text:
Who's Your Daddy?

Who's Your Daddy? is an alternate capitalization of "Who's your daddy?", a phrase expressing dominance, especially of a sexual nature.

Who's Your Daddy? may also refer to:

Music

 * "Who's Your Daddy?" (Lordi song), 2006
 * "Who's Your Daddy?" (Toby Keith song), 2002
 * "Who's Your Daddy?", a song by Benny Benassi from Best of Benny Benassi
 * "Who's Your Daddy?", a song by Daddy Yankee from El Cartel: The Big Boss
 * "Who's Your Daddy", a song by Ringo Starr from Y Not

Television

 * Who's Your Daddy? (2005 TV series), an American reality television series
 * Who's Your Daddy? (2020 TV series), an Indian streaming television series
 * "Who's Your Daddy?" (House), a 2006 episode of House
 * "Who's Your Daddy?/Homewrecker", an episode of The Fairly OddParents
 * Who's Your Daddy Now?, a Filipino sitcom
 * Who's Your Daddy, a 2012 episode of Royal Pains

Other uses

 * Who's Your Daddy? (film), a 2003 film written and directed by Andy Fickman
 * Who's Your Daddy? (video game), a 2015 video game created by Joe Dave Williams
 * Who's Your Daddy?, also known as Father Figures, a 2017 American comedy film

title: Who's Your Daddy?