Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ancient Egypt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

edit

Archives
Archive 1, Archive 2, Archive 3, Archive 4, Archive 5

To-do list for Wikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Egypt:

edit · history · watch · refresh

Needed articles.

We should have an article on every Pharaoh & every nome in Ancient Egypt. Let's check to see if every important Egyptologist has an article. I'm sure the rest of us can think of other articles we should have.

Cleanup.

To start with, most of the general history articles badly need attention. And I'm told that at least some of the dynasty articles need work. Any other candidates?

Standardize the Chronology.

A boring task, but the benefit of doing it is that you can set the dates !(e.g., why say Khufu lived 2589-2566? As long as you keep the length of his reign correct, or cite a respected source, you can date it 2590-2567 or 2585-2563)

Stub sorting

Anyone? I consider this probably the most unimportant of tasks on Wikipedia, but if you believe it needs to be done . . .

Data sorting.

This is a project I'd like to take on some day, & could be applied to more of Wikipedia than just Ancient Egypt. Take one of the standard authorities of history or culture -- Herotodus, the Elder Pliny, the writings of Breasted or Kenneth Kitchen, & see if you can't smoothly merge quotations or information into relevant articles. Probably a good exercise for someone who owns one of those impressive texts, yet can't get access to a research library.

Fix/reclaim the Great Pyramid of Giza.

Moved to Archive 1:

Preproject discussion between Hajor, JCarriker, and llywrch.
Example article discussion: Hatshepsut
ALoan joins, suggests template. Discussion of standardizing transliteration of names, chronology, and dates.
Agreement to take the list of Pharaohs out of Pharaoh & turn it into its own article.
Another discussion about dates
Request for help with Egyptian numerals.
Announcement about WikiProject:Ancient Near East.
Request for help with Haman (Islam)

Moved to Archive 2:

Discussion about the names of kings.
About the WikiProject & Afrocentrism
Numerous discussions about templates for hieroglyphs
Questions about the articles List of Pharaohs and Conventional Egyptian chronology
An offer to help access KMT back issues
Request about Esna
Request about Pylon
Nubia and the WikiProject

Moved to Archive 3:

Chronology issues more broadly
Ramses/Rameses/Ramesses
Unsolved problems in Egyptology
Hatshepsut FAC
Portal ?
New Egyptian Chronology write-up
Akhenaten
Todo list

Moved to Archive 4:

Articles for the Wikipedia 1.0 Project

Moved to Archive 5:

Four sons of Horus
Deletion list
Change on Project page
Tutankhamun
Ptolemies
Peer review needed!
Improvement drive
Data dumps
Stub sorting
Pharoah template
Ahmose Meryt-Amon / Ahmose-Meritamon
Ancient Egypt template
Calling for help
Image help
Location maps?
Project banners
So this is where you're hiding
Naming Conventions
Userbox
Abu Simbel was in Sudan?
Attempts to edit Hermeticism
Great Pyramid of Giza
Finishing Ahmose I
Ahmed Osman
Tagging talk pages and assessing articles
Seichim

1 Project directory
2 Mark Antony
3 Illustrative Images from the Altes Museum, Berlin
4 The project tag.
5 Ahmose I FA
- 5.1 December 29, 2006
6 Rosetta Stone: ACID collaboration of the week
7 Peer review
8 Stablepedia
9 Requesting citations to back up Egyptian chronology article
10 Pharaoh article
11 Haty-a
12 New proposed Egypt project
13 An editor with a surprising name
14 Transliteration
15 Wikipedia Day Awards
16 The shortcut for your project
17 Map series
18 Research request area
19 One more reminder to be on guard
20 Request for help: Osiris and Horus
21 Articles on religion and gods
22 New Template
23 Goddess question
24 Ramesses II
25 Request for expert advice
26 Request for a cleanup/expert advice
27 Credentials check.
28 Amenhotep I
29 Ramesses II moved
30 Protecting Hatshepsut from vandalizing edits
31 Touregypt
32 Beware of Ancient Egypt deathrays
33 Ancient Egyptian cuisine

[edit] Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 15:03, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mark Antony

Mark Antony is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy (Talk) 23:58, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

This does have little to nothing to do with us. I took a look at it but can't really help you. It's far beyond "Ancient Egypt" Thanatosimii 15:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

If this article has nothing to do with this Project, you might want to removed your template from its talk page. Thank you, Sandy (Talk) 19:50, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Illustrative Images from the Altes Museum, Berlin

More to come, as I process the images. If anyone has requests for anything in priority, please let me know.

Other things that may be of interest include the famous "Green Head", the (small!) bust of Queen Tiy as well as her fragmentary coffin lid, reliefs depicting Amenophis III and Tutankhamen, plus many things from the Amarna period, including of course the famous head of Nefertiti.

Auf weidersehen from Berlin! Captmondo 23:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

If you are on this list and get the chance to see this collection in Berlin, by all means do so, as you will not be disappointed.

Cheers! Captmondo 04:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

That Thutmose III and Re-Harakhte stele will come in handy if I ever get around to somthing on Reeve's theory on atenism. I recently read his book, "Egypt's false prophet", and he takes the position that atenism is the culmination of the previous four or five kings trying to switch the patron god away from Amun to some aspect of Re, particularly Re-Harakhte. Not that that's what that has to be, but it would make a good illustration of the god nonetheless. Thanatosimii 17:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Glad to be of some help then. The theory you mention sounds interesting, will have to look for the title you mention. Captmondo 13:11, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

If anyone wants to start a Web page for the Nubian pharaoh Amanitenmemide, you have a ready image to start with. ;-)

Now on to the Roman and Greek items from the Pergamon Museum!

Cheers! Captmondo 02:06, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The project tag.

Concerning the tag that goes on the top of the talk page for all the pages in our "jurisdiction," so to speak, is it possible to add another element that can be included in certain pages? Specifically, I have discovered that the primary works for several periods are not in english, and I was wondering if there were a way to change the template to include an optional, "The best sources from this period are in xxxx, and the attention of a xxxx speaker would be helpful" or some such flag. After finishing up Thutmose III, I've had this urge to straighten out the first intermediate period, but I was told outrightly in a "suggested reading" list in the back of my Grimal that there has been a lot of recent up to date research which can straighen out this period, in French and German. I don't read german, and I read even less french. Such a flag might help attract one who can do so, or at the very least it will warn people not to collect the english sources and treat them as they are up to date and authoritative. Thanatosimii 17:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Its a good idea, but changing the template is not easy (I copied a pre-existing one)! We could use a separate template to flag these specific issues, and perhaps link to a foreign wikipedia ? Markh 12:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I know even less about this tag editing stuff... is there a place for technical questions somewhere? I do agree that a link to a good foreign version (especially the German one, which usually has the best versions of pages we're lacking) would be helpful as well. Thanatosimii 19:36, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ahmose I FA

Well, the GA passed with flying colors, and accordingly since Captmondo and I now have the time to adress concerns, we're nominating it for FA. Any help from other members of the project here would be helpful, though. Thanatosimii 01:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Ahmose I passed! So, since we now have a FA on a Pharaoh, should we make it the Selected Article (which now really can be called "Featured Article" ) for the Portal? No hard feelings against Smenkhkare, but we've finally got a FA now, and we should probably use it.
By the way, what's the deal with "today's featured article" on the main main-page do we ever want to suggest that for selected FA? Thanatosimii 17:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I have changed the portal FA, just using the introduction. Not sure what you mean in the second paragraph. Markh 10:36, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I screwed up some puncuation. How does one go about getting a FA considered for "Today's featured article"? Thanatosimii 02:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Go to the Today's featured article/requests section of Wikipedia. Take a look at the required format, and be ready to add a short description at the bottom including the desired date (if any) for it to appear. Hope that helps! Captmondo 03:22, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] December 29, 2006

"Ahmose I will appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 29, 2006." Yippee! Markh 09:35, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Congrats all around! This certainly ought to bring more exposure to this group. A minor word of warning, having gone through this previously: monitor the page that day and be ready to do lots of vandalism reverts! Cheers! Captmondo 10:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Um, it was going to be FA for this day, it's been changed to somthing about redshift... does anyone know why? Thanatosimii 03:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I just took a look at Today's featured article/December 2006 and the article summary is not listed there for today or the rest of the few remaining days for this year. Nor does it appear in the January 2007 list either. Where did you get confirmation that it was accepted onto the front page? I suspect you will need to resubmit. Captmondo 17:15, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

It's in the history on that page. It was changed because someone wanted the 30th's article changed to someone on their hundreth birthday or some such thing. I asked what's going to happen now, but haven't gotten a response. Thanatosimii 17:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, it's going to be rescheduled sometime mid-january. Thanatosimii 20:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rosetta Stone: ACID collaboration of the week

Just in case people here were not aware of it, Rosetta Stone has been chosen as the weekly article improvement drive collaboration. Obiously, people from the Ancient Egypt project should get involved as they are probably the most competent on the subject. The article so far isn't that bad, but it's quite rudimentary and such a core topic deserves better. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 19:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review

Hi, I have just put 2 articles for peer review, Valley of the Kings and Egyptian hieroglyphs. One I have worked on extensively, the other is a nice long article which has been updated bymany people. Can someone swing by these and give them a once over and leave comments, etc. Cheers in advance Markh 10:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stablepedia

Beginning cross-post.

See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★MESSED ROCKER★ 03:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

End cross-post. Please do not comment more in this section.

[edit] Requesting citations to back up Egyptian chronology article

Some nutter was going on about the supposed lack of Biblical bias in the dating of Ancient Egyptian chronologies dating back to the mid-19th century in this article. I reverted, but noted that that while this information is valid, it is not backed up by any valid citations on this point. So citations are needed!

I can't find anything that directly critiques early Victorian-era chronological references for Ancient Egypt. Can somebody out there come up the appropriate citations so that we can shut this argument down effectively?

Cheers! Captmondo 17:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

There are precious few books on the topic of the history of Egyptology; still there ought to be somthing about this somewhere. You might actually consider going down the biblical approach, however. Biblical scholars in the 19th century held to 4004 as creation since if you literally add up the dates in Genesis, you get that. Most, even those holding to inerrancy, will now reject a literal interpretaion of those dates, and it shouldn't be that hard to find somthing like "... but when archaeological discoveries showed history going back further than the literal dates..." in some book. The mere presence of that phrase would be citation enough, I believe, to use in citing that information. Thanatosimii 17:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I just saw this note. I've seen this discussed in print (which is why I added it to the original draft of this article), but I honestly can't remember which book I saw it in. At the moment, I don't know when I'll have the chance to do the necessary legwork to find that specific source.

But I can offer some impression of the problem that confronted 19th century Biblical scholars. I have at hand my great-grandmother's Bible, which happens to be a "Teacher's edition" published by the Oxford Press in 1896, and has copious discussions in the back discussing how the state of archeology circa 1890s fit with the Bible. (Despite it's date, in many ways the discussion is as valuable as anything published today. I have scanned about a third of the plates in this edition & uploaded the scans to Wikipedia Commons, & the illustrations of the Codices Sinaiticus & Ephraemi Rescriptus that appear in Wikipedia come from that book.) There is a discussion of the chronology of the Old Testament, from Adam to the patriarch Joseph, & provides two different totals of the years between the Biblical Flood & when Joseph was sent as a slave to Egypt: there is the 'Hebrew" total of 1072 & the LXX total of 1737. (The two texts vary in the numbers of years key individuals lived.) Remember, according to Genesis all humankind was destroyed during the Biblical Flood, so the oldest kingdoms of man -- like Egypt -- had to come into existence after the Flood.

Now, if I turn to my copy of the Loeb edition of Manetho's fragments, we immediately encounter a problem. According Eusebius, the patriarch Joseph "was appointed king of Egypt" during the 17th dynasty (Mantheo, fr. 48). I'll admit that I'm being lazy here, but relying the totals provided in other fragments of Manetho's chronology I find that between the beginning of the First dynasty & the end of the Eleventh alone, Manetho states 2300 years passed -- far more than either version of the Old Testament offer.

I assume the way that learned writers handled this discrepency over the following 18 (or more) centuries was to argue that Manetho made mistakes in his calculations, or that the quotations made from his texts were faulty -- or quite simply, they just ignored the problem. After all, Egyptology was for many centuries a very esoteric subject, & during that time it was far easier to find fraud & myth than reliable facts. However, when scholars were at last able to read the primary texts of ancient Egypt in the 19th century, this contradiction could not be overlooked any longer: they had incontestable & documented proof that human history extended earlier than the date of the Biblical Flood! Here my need to remember my source is important, because I remember that the 19th century's first reaction to this problem was to hide it; the first Egyptologists consciously misrepresented the information in these texts & inscriptions in order to shoe-horn them into accepted Biblical chronology. It wasn't until around 1850 that Egyptologists were confident enough to make this problem known, & it is my own modest opinion that this information helped to accelerate scientific interest in the age of the earth & the discovery of prehistoric life (e.g., dinosaurs, trilobites, the Neandertal Man, etc.).

Resistence to acknowledging this problem still continues, mainly by people who hold tightly to Biblical inerrancy, but I feel it's far more healthy to admit that all humans make mistakes, & because the Bible is written by humans there are errors in it. After all, to admit that there are errors in the Bible does not logically lead to the conclusion that it is completely in error. -- llywrch 01:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pharaoh article

I'm not a member of this project, but I was looking at the Pharaoh article recently, and it looks to be in need of some serious clean-up. Specifically this passage:

Lets make this clear to all, because in the educated community, this is an undebatable fact upon many factors including conquests, languages, history, religions, and most importantly the simple fact of time frame. The Copts ARE the modern descendants of the ancient Egyptians and ARE the living descendants of the Pharaohs. These people were converted to Christianity during the Roman period in Egypt (coptic christians). Which explains the coptic languages derivative and so forth. But important to note - Roman Period is when ancient Egyptians, the Pharaohs, converted to Christianity, specifically known today as Coptic Christian.

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/EGYPT/PTOLEMY.HTM If you don't beleive this site, you can go to absolutely any scholarly journal, history book, or scholarly website and it will tell you the Roman Period. Be careful of websites where people just give their opinion. http://www.civilization.ca/CIVIL/EGYPT/egctimee.html You will find this: Roman Period 332 B.C. - A.D. 395, and take note that this was the period that the ancient Egyptians were converted to Christianity. The end of the Roman Empire was in A.D. 395, Egypt was controlled from Byzantium until the Arab conquest in A.D. 641

The writing there is obviously Unencyclopedic. Maybe a project member could fix it? Thanks! MightyAtom 05:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Haty-a

Do we have a page about the office of Haty-a, The term for local prince, count, baron, prince-govenor, etc., and if so, what is it called? Which translation is it. If not, we really ought to have once since it's a fairly important office. But then the question is again what should it be called? There doesn't seem to be any standard translation that everyone uses, and I'm guessing the transliteration of ḥ3ty-` isn't going to go over well with the technical restrictions. Any ideas? Thanatosimii 03:36, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Stephen Quirke's Titles and Bureaux of Egypt 1850-1700 BC translates it as 'Mayor', but in the Shipwrecked Sailor it is usually 'Count'. Both of which are a bit dull! [1] uses 'governor'. So there doesn't seem to be a good standard translation. HAty-a (upper case 'A') seems to be a directish tranliteration, so perhaps we should use that? Markh 22:18, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... is it possible to get the transliteration symbol actually in the title, or would technical restrictions get it messsed up? I think the transliteration is supposed to be somthing like ḥʔty-ʕ, although the two IPA symbols aren't quite accurate. Can that actually be a title under the technical restrictions? Furthermore, on a tangent, does anyone know how to make those symbols turn up right on my screen? it reads somthing like box-box-t-y-box to me right now... Thanatosimii 00:38, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

You may not have the correct font installed. I think that would be a technical restriction for using the IPA symbols, most people probably won't have them. I have a kids book on heiroglyphs somewhere that has the transliterations turned into 'words' (if you see what I mean), so that might do (we should also have TAty - vizier) Markh 10:34, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'll put somthing together on HAty-a for now, since I've got that as a red link in a page I'm trying to get to GA. Thanatosimii 14:48, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New proposed Egypt project

There is no also a proposed project dealing with Egypt in general at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Egypt. Any parties interested in working on articles related to the more current aspects of Egypt are more than welcome to indicate their interest there, so we can know whether there is sufficient interest to start such a project. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 22:57, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] An editor with a surprising name

I have David Rohl watchlisted for reasons I won't bother sharing at the moment. As I was looking over my watch list, I noticed these edits from an account with a familiar name (the only edits this account have made). Anyone know if this is the David Rohl, Egyptologist? The edits made are mostly noncontroversial (date of birth, status of a book at the press), although one obviously required a {{fact}} (Kitchen's comment about Rohl's theories), so I haven't bothered to revert them -- although I'd feel more comfortable if I knew these facts were true. -- llywrch 19:30, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd be very skeptical about the nature of what Kitchen actually said, and if it can't be verified, it should probably be taken out. The argument that the Conquest happened in the Middle Bronze (which is probably what he conceded as an outside possibility) is the standard argument for almost any Early Date exodus supporter, and is invariably followed by the argument that the Middle Bronze II C destruction layer is misdated and should be pulled down by a century (i.e. not during the second intermediate period). Whoever this suprisingly named editor is, I believe he's trying to twist Kitchen's comments to mean somthing that Kitchen never meant. Thanatosimii 20:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Which is why I added the fact template to this article. At the moment I don't see a pressing need to delete this contribution, & I'm willing to wait for this editor to add the necessary source so readers can verify just what Kitchen did say. If anything, I'm bemused by the possibility that if this editor is Rohl, he has tacitly accepted a biography of himself that one editor in the past claimed was very unfair to him! (Although I'm still puzzled why that person thought so: most of the biographical details were taken directly from Rohl's own webpage.) -- llywrch 21:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

If it is Rohl, I guess it's just our luck that he of all people chose to write somthing for wikipedia ;) Too bad we couldn't have gotten Redford or Grimal... heck, I'd settle for Hawass. Thanatosimii 22:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Update: Since I wrote the above, Mr Rohl & I have been exchanging emails over this article. He appears to be reasonable so far, but is concerned that I haven't offered any proof that his theory about Egyptian Chronology is not accepted by the majority of Egyptologists, as well as his need to provide a cite for the Exodus Conference. If the rest of you would watchlist the article in case I fail to explain to him the Wiki way with this article (hell, I really don't have that strong of an opinion on the identification of the Biblical Sheshak), & he decides to start an edit war on the article. -- llywrch 18:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Transliteration

Further information: Transliteration of ancient Egyptian

I propose we need a Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Ancient Egyptian) (paralleling Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese), Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Indic)), in particular addressing transliteration issues. In particular, ȝ vs. 3 (vs. ɹ or what); ỉ vs. j, but in general just guidelines on how to name things. dab (𒁳) 16:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I've had to argue that two pages be moved back to their previous names this month because we lack such a convention to point to. Some general things to include I would think would be:
*Avoid greek names (i.e. no Sesostris, Amenemes, Amenophis, or Tuthmosis) but give their greek names in parentheses if common.
*Use (mostly) Gardiner's transliteration system, as it is the one I have seen overwhelmingly used in scholarly journals. However, try to find a replacement for that 3 for the aleph. There doesn't seem to be a good symbol for it... I can't seem to think of any places where changes are necesarry to his system right now.
*Names should be transliterated somewhere in the article on the so-named person or thing, but the common term should ideally use the common transliteration system- Aleph and Ayin become A's; i becomes I; w stays W or becomes U; all other letters become what they are transliterated into except for the augmented symbols- the four h's become h, h, kh, and kh, the funny t, d, and s become Tj, Dj, and Sh; Both s's stay S, the one that was z in the old kingdom remains a S; ... Am I forgetting any big ones?
That was a bit of a ramble on, but those are some places to start from, I suppose. Of course the big rule would be to chuck any and all of these rules if the literature uses a different version overwhemingly more frequently. Thanatosimii 01:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I second the motion, as I also recognize the need, (though I would not be able to provide much by way of expertise). What is the process for drafting up a sample template of this type? Captmondo 02:58, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Anyone thought about this ? Can I just create the page with the notes above (and then get them cleaned up)? Markh 16:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 20:01, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The shortcut for your project

You use WP:EGYPT as a shortcut to your project. However, on December 26, 2006 WikiProject Egypt started which is a project that create, improve, and maintain articles related to the nation of Egypt and create guidelines for articles about Egypt. We need to create a shortcut to our project. So, please consider creating another shortcut to your project like: WP:ANEGYPT so that we can make WP:EGYPT redirect to our project. Thank you.

--Meno25 01:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:ANEGYPT is a little long. I wouldn't object to somthing like WP:ANEGY or somthing... or perhaps we could do a roundabout soulution and take WP:KMT? Thanatosimii 03:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

While I like WP:KMT, there's the potential for conflict with the Kuomintang, which uses KMT as its acronym. WP:KEMET maybe? Captmondo 03:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Is it really likely that there's going to be a wikiproject:kuomintang? But yes, I see potential conflict. However, there could be concievable conflict with just about anyone based on whatever we take. Still I suppose WP:KEMET works just as well. Thanatosimii 05:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Map series

I've started a world history map series based on The Cassell Atlas of World History by John Haywood et al. I would like to do a similar series for just Egypt, using the Penguin Atlas of Ancient Egypt. Does anyone have or know where I can find a high-resolution blank map of the region, preferably with the areas of western Libya, Nubia, the Levant, and Cyprus shown, that I could use as a template? Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 19:11, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Research request area

We could use a seperate page, or at least area, for putting up requests for research that other people might be able to fulfill. Some of us have more access to some books and journals than others. For instance, I can get ahold of the Journal of Near Eastern Studies, but not the Journal of Egyptian Archaeology. If we had a source collaboration page, I could request research be done by someone who did have JEA access, and someone who needed JNES research done could put up somthing and I could go look it up. Additionally, we could each list books we own so that we know who has what.

Specific example: We could use Thutmose III : A New Biography over at Thutmose III, to fill in certain gaps in artistic and domestic development. After we get information from that book, I believe only minor work is required before we peer review then and go for FA. Now, I can get that book in a month or so, but if any of you have access to that book, I could put a request up and you, if you had the time, could do some research and get the work done weeks earlier than I could. (by the way, if anyone does have access to that book, we could use help). This, I believe, would just be a simple way to get the most help to the places of most need. More potential for collaboration is better than less. Thanatosimii 21:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] One more reminder to be on guard

Today is the day Ahmose I is Today's Featured Article. Thus, be on guard if you have the time to keep watch, since at least one vandal has shown up already. Thanatosimii 01:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for help: Osiris and Horus

The Jesus as myth article currently includes an almost entirely unreferenced section on Osiris and Horus. If someone knowledgeable about Egyptian mythology could check the accuracy of its statements in that area and indicate appropriate references, that would be great. EALacey 10:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I have left comments on that talk page. I don't think much of those arguments (I am nearly certain that they either directly or indirectly derive from the far out of date works of E. A. Wallace Budge) but given the title of the article, it is perfectly suited to cover such theories therein. However, if a scholar with the necesarry credentials cannot be produced, I would think it only fair to add a "this is not accepted in the disciplines of Egyptology and Second Temple Judaic Studies" proviso. Thanatosimii 05:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Articles on religion and gods

I have done some editing on Amduat, Coffin Texts, and particularly Four sons of Horus becasue I found they were full of personal opinions and interpretations (which were unreferenced). I found it difficult because I couldn't find any basis for what was being said so I tried to replace it with quotes from texts and so on. My editing skills are a bit primitive and loading pics takes an age cos I am on dial up. Is anyone looking at religion specifically? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Apepch7 (talk • contribs) 22:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

Ooops sorry forgot to Apepch7 23:14, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Template

Hi, I saw this page and you guys didn't have a template so use this.

This user is a member of
WikiProject Ancient Egypt.

( Seong0980 07:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC) )

[edit] Goddess question

Hi,

In the article Amunet I found something I have questions about, but it was added by an anonym IP a long time ago and no source was mentioned. The sentence is: "she [Amunet] was said, as representing the air, to have become the lesbian consort of Iabet, the moon itself, and was depicted as such on tombs, coffins, and sarcophaguses." Now as far as I know, Iabet is the personification of the East, and she was depicted with Amentet, the personification of the West. Was Amunet identified with Amentet or was the anonymous editor mistaking one for the other because of the similar names? And was Iabet associated with the moon? (I haven't heard of female Egyptian deities associated with the moon yet.) – Alensha ^talk 16:10, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ramesses II

This article could be featured with a bit of work, I think. I changed some info on his family background, esp. siblings, and wrote new articles (Henutmire, Nebettawy, Princess Tia.) The "Building activity and monuments" section is way too long, especially considering that all of these merit their own articles (which, in most cases, they have, but those independent articles go into less detail than this long section). The tomb of Nefertari should either have its own articles or be moved to Nefertari's article. Also, the exodus stuff should have its own article and discussed only briefly in the main article. It's long enough to have its own article, also, with all respect to religious readers, I doubt this is serious enough to be discussed in Ramesses' article in full length. – Alensha ^talk 16:03, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Anyone else? :) – Alensha ^talk 21:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I think what you have done so far has been much needed for that article. Shunting people to look at articles that provide more in-depth information elsewhere is certainly called for, especially when it comes to specific monuments and the ever-contentious "Pharaoh of the Exodus?" section. Unfortunately there's still a lot of cleaning up to be done, especially by the contributor who cited works but didn't provide page numbers -- don't expect this to get to Feature Quality status if this isn't taken care of. This particular article has also proved to be a magnet for vandals and for those with definite opinions on the subject, which has made me leery of devoting too much time to this particular article in the past, so expect a running battle trying to keep it together. I would also suggest taking a look at the German and Polish equivalents of this article, as they both became featured articles in their respective languages -- even if you can't read either language directly (I can't) there are some good ideas (and images) that you may be able to reuse in the English version. For what it is worth, I think the mummy section ought to come after or be a sub-section of the area devoted to his tomb. Finally, there are a wide range of images that could be called upon to illustrate various points on WikiMedia; see: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Ramses_II. Keep up the good work! Captmondo 16:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

The article is clearly shaping up (or perhaps slimming down is better in this case) quite nicely, but I'm afraid the formatting could use some work still. The page is a little picture heavy, both in size and quantity of images. I'm not sure if this is against the rules for style, but perhaps it's a good idea to remove some and put a commonscat notice directly in that section linking to images of ramesseid construction.
The 19th dynasty is outside of my area of specialty, but I think I can easilly put together a short section on his dates of reign as well. You also might want to consider cutting out the "Names" section. Those sections were prolific before the pharaoh infoboxes were introduced, which now renders them superfluous and removed in most articles. The only data there which is not very redundant is his names' likely pronunciations, however there's no citation for that, and thus it might be better to just cut it. It's always in the history if a citation can be produced, at which time that could also be put in the infobox. Thanatosimii 19:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

it is getting better now, thanks to everyone who worked on it! – Alensha ^talk 22:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for expert advice

Hi there, I'm one of the editors involved with the influenza page. We are looking for some academic references or discussion of ancient Egyptian animal agriculture. In particular, any information on if they had pigs and waterfowl/fishfarms. If anybody has information on this, please drop a note on the [talk page]. Thank you. TimVickers 22:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for a cleanup/expert advice

See the [talk page] for the Old Kingdom article for more information. -HawkeyE 10:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Credentials check.

I was recently reading an article by Aidan Dodson on the mortuary temple of Amenhotep I. I've run across his name in citations here before, so I supposed he was a reliable source, but I found that this article was hosted at [2], which has connections with certain... fringe authors. Is this just a case of strange bedfellows, or is Dodson on the fringe too? Thanatosimii 19:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it is 'strange bedfellows' see [3] and [4]. Markh 08:08, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Amenhotep I

For the past few months, I've been stumbling over sources with relevant data on Amenhotep I. I've been piecing it together, and I am approaching FA levels of exhaustiveness. I've still got to add a little on the Ebers papyrus, Amduat, and rewrite his building projects stuff, but at least I have the sources I need for that on me. However, Exhaustiveness is not the only thing required for a FA; since most of the text is my own, it all reeks of my style a little to much, I think. So, if anyone wants to take a look at smoothing off some rough edges, it would be helfpul, since I plan on putting this up for FA soon. I have a week and a half away from school now, and since that affords me the best amount of time to respond to FA nomination comments, I do hope to be able to nominate it within that timespan. Thanatosimii 03:24, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ramesses II moved

Someone has moved the above article! Does anyone know how to get it back without losing all of the edit history ? Markh 14:35, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Protecting Hatshepsut from vandalizing edits

Given the recent spate of vandalization from various anonymous IP sources of the Hatshepsut article, I asked for and got that page set to semi-protected status, which means that only registered or long-standing users can edit the page directly (note that this ban is only in place until mid-April -- but it may be long enough to deter some of the more persistent vandals). I know this is an issue on some other pages as well (Ramesses II comes to mind) so for those who might want to ask an Admin to protect a page, here is where to go. Captmondo 17:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Touregypt

someone came through wikipedia and deleted just about every last instance of this site from the entire place. I cleaned up a lot of it, but we should be on the lookout for more that I missed. On this note, does anyone really know why that site keeps getting pogromed out? This is not the first time I remember someone going bananas over it... Thanatosimii 03:37, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I didn't like how it was added to the spamlist & ranted about that process on Wikipedia: Village pump (policy). So far the essay has been treated like a troll -- that is, ignored. Comments appreciated. -- llywrch 20:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree that touregypt has useful material and should not be placed on the spamlist just because somebody does not like it. I would suggest that a person who removes a reference should replace it with an alternative. Just pulling out references is actually a destructive act, judgmental, and can leave an article in a mess. Ekem 02:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

If you look at the discussion, there seems to have been a lot of name calling from at least one administrator – so I am rather despairing of what we can actually do. It seems that the the wikipedia community is actually no such thing. Markh 22:21, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Markh, if you mean whom I think you do, he appears to be encountering some more problems due to his brusque tone & inflexible stance on the matter; have a look at the relevant thread on WIkipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. But I'm posting here to ask for a favor from the rest of the folks: can someone post a request for a link to this website at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist? One request to whitelist a link to touregypt.net seems to have stalled & has been left to wither away. -- llywrch 00:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. I am more upset by the attitude of this admin, than by the blacklisting of the site. Markh 12:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Touregypt has been added to the whitelist, and it doesn't look like it's being objected to by opponents this time, so we can theoretically restore the pages now. However, I was personally told:
* Try and use other websites that could convey the same information.
* The presence of ads doesn't bother most of us, but some will still feel that Tour Egypt isn't the best authority to use on Wikipedia, since they are mostly a commercial venture.
*The rules on external links still aplly.
Now, the consensus here seems to be that there never was a spam problem with this page at any point, however in order to be gracious winners, I suggest that restoration of the use of that domain should be done with some consideration (not necesarraly as a project, just us weighing each link personally) as to if each individual page is useful, and not done en masse. Thanatosimii 22:31, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Although it's been a while since I've worked in this topic, I made a stab at what I think is how we should proceed with Unas -- as well as pushed this past a stub. Does it work as an example? -- 06:18, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Beware of Ancient Egypt deathrays

Dear members of WikiProject Ancient Egypt, may I ask for volunteers for keeping an eye at User:Reddis contribution in this area? I'm more than willing to assume his good faith, but nevertheless he may be taken away by his sympathy for non-standard theories. Please see e.g.

Pjacobi 18:20, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Please have a look at the [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/History and geography<article content RFC]] filed regarding Dendera_Temple_complex#The_Dendera_light. --Pjacobi 11:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ancient Egyptian cuisine

I couldn't find anything in the main articles on Ancient Egyptian cuisine so I thought I would start working on one. Does anyone know if we have anything written on the subject?

Peter ^Isotalo 15:30, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/k/Wikipedia_talk%7EWikiProject_Ancient_Egypt_d5fd.html"

Categories: To do | To do, priority undefined