Talk:Scythians#rfc 51DFD85

(Old Persian: Sakā; New Persian: ساکا Saka; Greek: Σάκαι Sakai; Armenian: սկյութները Skyout'nerə; Latin: Sacae, Sanskrit: शक Śaka), and Sai (Chinese: 塞; Old Chinese: *sˤək), respectively.[8]

Wiki article by this name reports Scyths allied with medes and babylonians toppling Neo-assyrian empire. 2600:1011:B30E:8F2F:D979:BEA1:3ACC:9316 (talk) 15:24, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

This statement in the preface is neither sourced, nor reasonable. Why would "authors" especially "ancient" (being much closer in time) persist in applying name Scythians to various non related people? Stupidity or just knowing much better about "disappearance"? 91.230.101.219 (talk) 05:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

The statement needs to be deleted or replaced with something like "Modern historiography consensus on Scythians' extinction through having been totally assimilated ca 5th century AD disregards the abundance of references to Scythians in medieval and early modern sources". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.230.101.219 (talk) 10:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|Scythians|answered=yes}}

Under the "Culture and Society" > "Warfare" > "Weapons" > "Archery" section, there is a minor typo at the very end of the paragraph, "...possibly because *hey* might have been...".

Presumably, "hey" is meant to be written as "they" instead, and should be edited to fix this. Karma12th (talk) 23:36, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

:{{done}} tgeorgescu (talk) 00:19, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Hippocrates NEVER describes the Scythians as light skinned!!! REMOVE THE SOURCE IMMEDIATLY! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.180.144 (talk) 03:59, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

I'm no expert on the subject, but shouldn't the topics discussing the periods be included within the history one? Maybe that would help with the problem concerning the large amount of headlines.

Also, shouldn't the topics and sub-headlines be organized in chronological order? It seems that some subtopics, such as initial interactions with greeks, at the early period aren't arranged like that.Icy Train (talk) 12:06, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

The recent condensation of the page by @AirshipJungleman29 has removed too much information from the page. I have managed to salvage the history section by moving it to a separate page, but the rest of the article has still lost significant amounts of information during the condensation process and it keeps getting reverted by @Nikkimaria when I try restoring it. I know I am biased, since I am the one who wrote much of the pre-condensation article in the first place, but isn't it possible to condense the information without losing it? Antiquistik (talk) 22:18, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:Having more detailed subpages is how it should be done, per WP:DETAIL. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:24, 13 June 2025 (UTC)