Talk:Shoshenq II
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Egyptological subjects. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
[edit] {{cleanup}}
Article is confused. -x42bn6 03:29, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
The article is a fact based approach towards Shoshenq II based upon objects which were found in his intact tomb. It also touches on the shortcomings of certain theories about his exact identity but doesn't make any outlandish claims beyond those that can be inferred from the evidence of objects in his tomb. Finally, the article contains some information from Von Beckerath's more current 1997 German language book, Chronology of the Egyptian Pharaohs, which few non-German speaking readers can easily access. This web link below also notes the specific presence of items from Shoshenq I's time in Shoshenq II's tomb. [[1]] --Fabian Boudville 08:54, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
- No, I was just acting on the fact the revision at which I saw this article had Shoshenq, Sheshonq and a few other variants, conflicting ideas (apparently) and some weird structure. I just thought I'd stick the {{cleanup}} reason here. Oh, I'm no expert on Egyptian anything either. :) -x42bn6 08:59, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
I believe these difficulties have now been rectified with only the term Shoshenq being used to mention this king.
Dear UserX42bnb6,
- I've followed your suggestion and regularised the spelling of this Pharaoh's name to 'Shoshenq' as Wikipedia follows and provided full academic sources for my points. I hope this passes muster with Wikipedia's editors. With kind Regards--Fabian Boudville 23:28, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Original Research
There is a whole lot of uncited, or poorly cited (no page numbers, footnotes, and so on), material here. Worse, the article is blatantly arguing a point rather than just giving the facts and/or citing the published arguments of Egyptologists (i.e., it is original research) Klompje7 14:31, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
I am doing my best to cite clear references for the article on Shoshenq II. The view that Shoshenq II was not the son of Osorkon I is NOT original research and was argued by Helen Jacquet-Gordon as early as the mid-1970's in a strongly worded Bi Or Book Review. Jacquet-Gordon is one of the foremost Egyptologists on the Third Intermediate Period--having discovered a new king from this era named Ini in 1979. The prominent German Egyptologist Von Beckerath has also dissented against Kitchen's orthodox view here on strong grounds in his popular 1997 German language book, Chronology of the Egyptian Pharaohs. Unfortunately since both author's work are in German or French, it is not easily accessible--or understood--in the English speaking world. --Leoboudv 11:10, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
All references and footnotes have been added by me now from Kitchen's standard TIPE 1996 book. The article includes evidence from Von Beckerath's more recent 1997 Chronologie des Pharaonischen Ägypten book which states that the High Priest Shoshenq C was not Shoshenq II but somebody else. It also gives clear footnotes from Beckerath's book. This is not original work at all. --24.87.128.182 21:18, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
