Latest comment: 8 months ago by UndercoverClassicist in topic GA Review
WikiProject iconVital articles GA‑class(Level 5)
WikiProject iconPhryne has been listed as a level-5 vital article in People, Miscellaneous. If you can improve it, please do.
 GAThis article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Mark Twain & Phryne Edit

The "arts of Phryne" was a phrase used by Mark Twain to delicately describe prostitution. Nowadays few people would understand the reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 02:33, 19 April 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Phryne and Diogenes Edit

Does anyone know what the original source material is from which we know that Phryne slept with Diogenes? I'd be interested to learn more about their affair, especially considering that Diogenes isn't well-known for his sexual nature. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:26, 15 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Now that I've looked into this some more, are you guys sure it was Phryne and not another hetaera who was involved with Diogenes the Cynic? This document by Athenaeus seems to indicate it was Lais of Hyccara, not Phryne, who dallied with Diogenes without exacting any payment: 11:54, 15 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Suspense is killing me Edit

Well, did they take her up on her offer to pay for the walls of Thebes? Clarityfiend 21:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As a matter of fact, No. They thought the condition she made -- that there be an inscription "Destroyed by Alexander, rebuilt by Phryne the Courtesan" was a bit much. Tom129.93.17.135

My favorite Phryne anecdote Edit

The public all liked the nude statue of Aphrodite, which was made by the famous sculptor Praxitiles using Phryne as a model. But the joke was that when the goddess Aphrodite saw the statue she exclaimed, "Oh, no! Where did Praxitiles see me naked?" 03:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External link Edit

I would like to add a link to the MythiMedia research project (Bologna University, Italy) The project explores the presence of Greek mythology in today's culture, and contains an article entitled "Phryne in Modern Art, Cinema, and Cartoon" ( [this is the address that should be linked]. The site is written in English. Fallingdrapery 00:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Phryne and the King of Lydia Edit

I'm not so sure that this bit is accurate. The Book of Lists has a similar incident, but this occurring between Lamia and Demetrius Poliorcetes (page 358). --Auric (talk) 02:16, 1 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Removed unreliable information Edit

I removed the sentence about Phryne adjusting her prices, and sleeping with the King of Lydia, because I could find no information about this. In fact this information was the original uncited page created by in 2004:

Phryne was a famous courtesan of ancient Greece who adjusted her prices for customers depending upon how she felt about them. When the King of Lydia wanted her favors she named a truly absurd price because she considered him loathsome; he paid the price and then levied a tax on his subjects to raise the sum. On the other hand, she gave herself to the philosopher Diogenes for free because she admired his mind.

I also removed the line about Diogenes. Tertullian (Apology 46) does actually say that "The harlot Phryne gratified the lust of Diogenes," but Athenaeus (xiii. 588) refers to Lais gratifying Diogenes. Singinglemon (talk) 18:27, 6 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Then I'll update the disambiguation page, which still references Phryne's price adjustments. Tokland (talk) 19:39, 24 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Large addition and cleanup done Edit

Fellow editors, I have just added a section with sheds some light on the doubtful authenticity of the description of Phryne’s trial. Also I have done some cleanup. The other sections need some more work obviously. I intend to get my hands on the title Ancient Supplication which I added to the section for further reading because it might contain information about Phryne which could be useful for the article. I also added a citation referring to Athenaeus as a source for the story about the walls of Thebes, but Athenaeus doesn’t mention that offer was not accepted. I’d appreciate it if a source can be given for information that the offer was declined. AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 15:00, 8 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Small modification to text and conversion of references to templates Edit

I just moved Pliny and Aelianus from the "Further reading" to the "References" by mentioning them as sources for the claim that Phryne is the model for the Aphrodite of Knidos. Also, I converted all references to use the templates. This did give me some issues, such as entering the first and last name of Pliny the Elder (typed his whole name as last name to solve it) and more importantly that I can't enter the line numbers of Athenaeus without getting them displayed as page numbers. Is there anyone who has solutions for these issues with the templates? One way to solve this would be to simply have one reference to chapter 13 of Athenaeus, would that be okay with everyone?

One more issue is that User:Stvfetterly added a link to the List of female adventurers, where Phryne isn't even listed. Would anyone mind if I'd remove this link? I also intend to do some more research on this article so that we can replace the reference to Chisholm with more appropriate (original) sources. AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 20:21, 12 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I was wondering about that too. Please do remove the link. Lt. Waaxe (talk) 20:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hyperides or Hypereides? Edit

I have noticed that the article uses both spellings. On Hypereides it says that both spellings are correct, but I think this article should have a uniform spelling. I personally prefer the latter spelling, as it matches the page on him Hypereides) but does anyone think otherwise? Lt. Waaxe (talk) 20:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article of Cooper in the references uses the spelling "Hyperides", but I agree that we should follow the spelling of the Wikipedia article on him. I just changed it.

Large overhaul of content on Life, Fame and Trial Edit

First of all User:Lieutenant_Waaxe, Athaeneus and Pesudo-Plutarch don't mention full nudity, only exposure of the breasts. Not sure about other sources, but I suspect any later sources telling something different are probably inventing details, as is explained in the article now.

I worked hard yesterday and today for the whole today to rework the article heavily to have everything referenced and to remove the reference to the Encyclopedia Brittanica. I hope any other editors would be prepared to check my changes for any errors, or improve the writing style if necessary. All the books I used for references have the relevant pages visible on Google Books. If there are any other comments I'd like to hear it. AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 16:31, 13 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh, all right then! I thought it was just later sources that emphasize the breasts because most paintings I've seen have her fully nude. I apologize for a bad assumption on my part. Lt. Waaxe (talk) 20:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem, I'm "guilty" myself as well. I actually wrote a bachelor's thesis about nudity in Classical Antiquity and stumbled on Phryne's case. When I was required to give a preliminary presentation on my thesis, I decided to mention it and assumed the version given on Wikipedia – that it really happened, without mentioning the controversy – was accurate :x Later I found Cooper's article when I was finishing my thesis, so I did mention the doubts in my finished thesis. But still I'm a bit embarrassed that I took the information that was present in this article for granted at the time :) AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 09:06, 16 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

”Mr. Roark pulled a Phryne in court and didn’t get away with it. We never believed that story in the first place.” Edit

There is good reason to believe that Ellsworth Toohey was comparing Howard Roark's presentation of his Cortlandt photographs in his trial (from Ayn Rand's novel 'The Fountainhead') as his only defense to Hypereides' disrobing of Phryne as a 'last resort'. (talk) 20:54, 13 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

GA Review Edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:Phryne/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: UndercoverClassicist (talk · contribs) 17:53, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll review this one. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:53, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This is a well-written and thoroughly researched article that does a good job of handling a topic which must largely be assembled from disparate evidence. In particular, it does an excellent job of showing the reader the great deal of less-than-certain primary source information, and the conflicting versions of Phryne's story, while hedging its own editorial judgements appropriately.

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:  
    Unquestionably - impeccably copyedited, clearly written and does a good job of making complex ideas accessible.
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:  
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:  
    I checked a sample of the references, which checked out straightforwardly.
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:  
    I have posted a very nit-picky CN tag - a passage of Hermippus is alluded to, but not directly referenced.
    C. It contains no original research:  
    Referencing to secondary sources is excellent - all factual statements in the editorial voice are sourced to academic secondary literature, and primary sources are used appropriately.
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:  
    I ran a sample of excerpts through Google and Google Books, and found no significant areas of similarity outside Wikipedia mirrors.
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:  
    Excellent on both the ancient history and the post-Classical reception.
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):  
    Concise but judiciously composed.
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:  
    See particularly the sections on the charge against Phryne and the conflicting accounts of the trial.
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:  
    Substantially stable, with incremental improvements, since at least Feb 2022.
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:  
    All copyright checks out.
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  
    The side-by-side of Kauffmann and Boulanger's portraits, with the caption, is particularly impressive. Other illustrations are well captioned and complement the text significantly.
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  
    Sails through the criteria — should certainly hold GA status.

@UndercoverClassicist: thanks for your comments. I dug up the Hermippus ref you asked for Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 22:01, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Great stuff. Congratulations on the GA! UndercoverClassicist (talk) 22:38, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]