Talk:Bellerophon

Untitled

INCORRECT!

Bellerophon and Uhhaziti

1. It is possible that Bellerophon (or else Bellerophontes) was the same person with Uhhaziti, king of Arzawa.
2. It is possible that "Arzawa" was the "Argive land", ancient colony of Argos (or else Achaeans, Myceneans), in Asia Minor (Arzawa < Arga-wa ).

Note: The word "-wa" means "land" in Hittite language.

--IonnKorr 19:14, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Cultural Reference

The saga of Belleraphon is a key part of John Barth's National Book Award winning story Chimera.

• ISBN 0618131701

Bellerophonetic Letters

I nearly created a new article concerning Bellerophonetic (sometimes Bellerophonic) Letters until I saw the reference footnote. Does anyone think it deserves it's own page? The reference is excellent though it doesn't actually give a definition that the letter contains prejudicial information regarding the bearer. Also the article to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern doesn't use the term either. Sorry for being a pain but I thought it would be good to have a page that could be connected to terms in letters etc.--FruitMonkey 09:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Would it really overwhelm this article? Better check the best usage of the term: Bellerophonetic doesn't sound the ring of pure gold.--Wetman 11:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Etymology

Out of curiosity, why would the name of a mythological hero whose story was around centuries before the Greeks made contact with the Romans contain a latin cognate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.107.81.13 (talk) 22:32, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Because both Latin and Greek are Indo-European languages. In fact, the branch of the Indo-European language family leading to Greek is more similar to the branch leading to Latin (and thus French, Spanish, etc) than to any other major group of I-E languages. Remember, "cognate" does not mean "borrowed from" it means "derived from the same source as". 199.90.28.195 (talk) 16:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110715021720/http://www.us.oup.com/us/companion.websites/0195153448/studentresources/chapters/ch25/?view=usa to http://www.us.oup.com/us/companion.websites/0195153448/studentresources/chapters/ch25/?view=usa

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:13, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Izan

Izan 145.140.14.178 (talk) 07:39, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Old English

Under 'capturing Pegasus', what Athena says is literally taken from an old translation of the text in archaic English. Since I am pretty sure that the original myth wasn't in old English, I don't see the point in this, since it feels out of place and a bit pretentious. Wouldn't it be better to paraphrase the source? Wikifan153 (talk) 19:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

The word gloss is too technical for laypeople.

In the last sentence, last paragraph, of the section Etymology, can we please use the word define/defines instead of gloss/glosses? This encyclopedia is written for laypeople, and the average Joe will only be confused by the word gloss. Indeed, I was greatly confused by it the first time I saw it. In fact, it still feels very out of place to me. Should we not seek to reduce the number of words that are confusing to an average reader?

Do people agree with me? Or do they want it to stay as is?

If people agree, I don't feel confident enough to change it. Can someone who is likely to do it properly please change it? Cat Majiv (talk) 04:05, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

@Cat Majiv: I've reworded that part to avoid the word "gloss". You're certainly correct that Wikipedia should try to make technical articles understandable. – Michael Aurel (talk) 14:53, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

@Michael Aurel Thanks very much! Cat Majiv (talk) 02:52, 18 March 2026 (UTC)