Talk:Theodosius Cistern

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Architecture Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Turkey Turkey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Water This article is within the scope of WikiProject Water, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Water supply-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article was created or improved during WikiProject Europe's "European 20,000 Challenge", which started on November 1, 2016, and is ongoing. You can help out!

About the date of being rediscovered

@Cs california, John Prattley, CeeGee, and Cplakidas: Hello, all sources I found on the Internet said that the Theodosius Cistern was rediscovered in 2010. If I'm not misunderstanding, it should be unaccessible until 2010. However in 2008 when this article created, there were already 2 images attached. It's a paradox and I have doubts about the reliability of these sources.  Vikarna 11:30, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• @Vikarna: Thanks for yor attention. I agree that the discrepancy should be examined. CeeGee 12:19, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @CeeGee: due to I didn't find accurate sources, and if we already reached a consensus, I'll add the disputed tag to this section. How about it?  Vikarna 02:07, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]