Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/3ht
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete. --Tony SidawayTalk 19:46, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] 3ht, st3t, Egyptian fields
Both pages are identical to Khet. Delete. Ken talk|contribs 13:18, August 13, 2005 (UTC)
No. In discussion of Egyptian fields as they regard standards of measure
A kht is the measured side of an 3ht measuring 100 cubits. A st3t is a kht of 100 royal cubits. Some 3ht were measured in mh t3 or land cubits, some were measured in royal cubits, some were measured in hayt or rods. Egyptian fields is focused on the system of crop rotation that left one field fallow and one in hay for the plow animal that caused there to be a measure of 300 royal cubits as the side of the set of three crop rotated fields.
The kht page will focus on its definition as length width and area in the same manner as the English perch and show how it was used to convert the area of a circle to the area of a square in the rhind papyrus.
"Gillings shows how a number of math problems in the rhind papyrus were calculated using the khet as a length, area and volume knowledgable mensurationists are aware that Mesopotamian measures would be sexigesimal and Egyptian measures septenary
The Egyptians calculated in unit fractions so to represent a number like Pi, rather than use 22/7 they might have represented it as 3 '8 '16 ... The khet seems to be in a relation to other Egyptian units such that it facilitates calculating the area of a circular field." Rktect 15:06, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
The 3ht page will focus on different types of land discussed in Gardiner and the relation of land type to the different standards of measure used to report them in the Wilbur papyrus. "Land tenure in the Ramesside period: Kahaty
The st3t page will focus on area measure for fields with sides defined as a chain of 100 cubits in Mesopotamia, Greece, Rome, Egypt and Persia and compare land measures like the atur or hour of march to the river journey or itrw. Both atur and itrw were a unit of 7 stadia of 300 royal cubits equal to 21,000 royal cubits or 1/10 geographical degree.
The atur page will focus on references to the atur in the 18th dynasty campaigns against kadesh and the itrw page will focus on Herodotus Book II comparisons of Egyptian, Greek and Persian measures and those used by Eratoshethes, Archimedes and Ptolomy.
Rktect 8/13/05 Their first sentence is identical because they are cross referenced. Additional information of a graphical nature might make for a good read but if you can't wait for me to finish something before you find it necessary to mark it for deletion, then I guess you won't get to see that.
- Why are there 3's in the titles? Kappa 16:17, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
There is an internet convention for citing Hieroglphic Egyptian. [manuel de codage]
The "3" represnts A. In hieroglyphic Egyptian the word for field is written in Manuel de codage as 3ht.
- This is the English Wikipedia, not the hieroglyphic Egyptian Wikipedia. Such conventions are confusing and should not be in article titles. There's also no need to keep recreating the same information in multiple articles. I would normally have voted to merge and redirect, but the ideosyncratic spelling causes me to vote delete. Zoe 19:10, August 13, 2005 (UTC)
Rktect 8/13/05 English is an amalgamated language. Many English words and phrases such as Ibis, 3kr (acre) Thank you (ank shu), mht3 (meter or land measure) and water (w3dwr) actually have Egyptian roots. You can say the same thing for 5000 other languages. Lugal for example is the root of both legal and regal. Of the 500,000 plus words in the English language, a significant number are jargon which means they are of great use to a small subset of people and much less use to most people.
It might be of interest to some people who actually have an interest to know the root of the word and to have some facts about it available in Wikipedia.
- Again, you're going to have to do more than make bald statements without support. "Regal", for example, comes from an ancient Indo-European root word which existed at least concurrently with, and possibly earlier than, Egyptian. These words did not bloom full-formed in the English language, nor is there any evidence that the words you keep trying to claim are Egyptian in fact are. "thank you" is two words, by the way, both from Germanic roots. Zoe 22:16, August 13, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. As near as I can tell, now Rktect is just making things up. Nandesuka 13:13, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
- See User talk:Rktect#Wikipedia:Votes for deletion#3ht. Zoe 19:08, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
- Redirect all of these to Egyptian fields, and start a sane stub on Egyptian areal measures there. dab (ᛏ) 06:18, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. For same reasons as previous articles created by Rktect. There is already an article, Ancient Egyptian weights and measures, which is supposed to cover this. -- Egil 08:58, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
I would respectfully suggest that there is a limit to how much you can put on one page. The kht needs its own page because its discussing standards of measure used as short hand aids to calculation with examples from the rhind papyrus and the Egyptian Mathematical Leather Roll (EMLR). The st3t needs its own page to focus on area measure for fields with sides defined as a chain of 100 cubits in Mesopotamia, Greece, Rome, Egypt and Persia and compare land measures like the atur or hour of march to the river journey or itrw. Both atur and itrw were a unit of 7 stadia of 300 royal cubits equal to 21,000 royal cubits or 1/10 geographical degree. The 3ht needs its own page to focus on different types of land discussed in Gardiner and the relation of land type to the different standards of measure used to report them in the Wilbur papyrus. "Land tenure in the Ramesside period: Kahaty
If I try and put all that on an existing page it will be very difficult for someone to find quickly and expeditiously exactly the set of facts they are looking for. I would also like to add some graphics to the page so that's another reason to break it up a little, you can only put one or two pictures on a page at any decent resolution before it becomes hard to load.Rktect 10:08, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Gene Nygaard 15:54, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
- Delete as former articles by Rktect, original research. -- < drini | ∂drini > 19:26, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
- Quick survey and list of other Vfd entries at [1] and [2]. -- < drini | ∂drini > 01:59, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.