User talk:Iry-Hor/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

→

Archive 13

thanks

Thank you for your kind words, help with edits and correcting (very embarrassing) typos. The was one thing I didn't understand. What exactly does using |ref=harv| do ? I can't "see" any difference. Check out my web site www.narmer.org . Tom Heagy Heagy1 (talk) 18:58, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Heagy1 So the sfn template is the best way to do references in Wikipedia (congrats for using it!!) but is a bit fragile. When it works well (see e.g. article Djedkare Isesi), any reader should be able to do the following steps:

- When reading the article, if you click on a reference e.g. "bla bla bla [5]" and you click on [5], it will send you to the end of the article, where you should see "Author1 Year, page".

- Now if you click again on that (that is on "Author1 Year") it sends you further down to the full reference, with author, title, publisher, isbn etc...

This second step works only if the template has been used correctly and is crucial otherwise the reader has to look for the reference by hand. For it to work, the page has to automatically relate the inline reference with the source, and for this it needs to know how the reference is cited in the text. If you put "|ref=harv" the software then knows to look for something of the form "{ {sfn|Author1|Year|p=} }" (don't put spaces between the } I put them to avoid activating the template) because it is the Harvard style of referencing. If you don't put it then the software will interpret "{ {sfn|Author1|Year|p=} }" correctly as a citation, except that it won't be able to link it with the full reference displayed at the end of the article. You can activate a Wikipedia code to see errors of the sn template displayed, it is all explained here: [1]. Errors then appear highlithed in bold red (you will see that there are still a bunch of them in Narmer). Finally two tips:

-If you have several authors, use "{ {sfn|Author1|Author2|Author3|Year|p=} }"

-If you want to reference something in a fancy way, for exemple a web page you can use: |ref={ {harvid|Fancy Ref} }" in the reference so that the sfn template will work as follows: "{ {sfn|Fancy Ref|Year|p=} }", the point being that you can replace Author1|Author2 etc. by whatever you want.

Finally I should add that the sfn template is a must if you one day wish to see Narmer promoted to good or featured status, which I think is possible given all you know and can thus add to Narmer. Treat: Narmer page views, about 600 people a day read your edits on Narmer! Iry-Hor (talk) 07:38, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Iry-Hor - Is this the right way to send you a message ? I appreciated your help on the formatting. I am really a beginner with regard to Wikipedia. I am amazed that 600 people a day looked at my changes. At this point ( thanks to you) all of the footnotes ( except 2 that aren't mine) point to references. I am not sure what to do with those 2. Perhaps n. 6 should be turned into a text note. What do you think ? All but 3 of the references relate to footnotes. The 3 are all relevant to Narmer. Is it a problem to have entries in the bibliography that aren't related to footnotes. Finally, does it matter if there is an error in the harv format, if it doesn't effect the the appearance of the article or the functionality of the pointing ? Heagy1 t

Heagy1 yes you can contact any user directly by writing on his talk page, alternatively, there is a way for you to mention him on any wikipedia page so that he receives a notification that he was mentionned. To do so write { {u|Username} } with no spaces. I think your idea for a footnote is good, you can do that with the efn template, like this: { {efn|group=note|Blablabla} } and at the end of the article write this: { {notelist|group=note|40em} } where you want the notes to appear. It is not a problem per se to have entries that aren't mentioned in the text, only these entries are useless unless they are specifically denoted in a separate section such as "Further reading" so that the reader knows where to look further if needed. I think you are doing a great job, especially for a new editor (using the sfn template is completely rare for new editors!) and most importantly, you add wiki content, which is what really matters. Formatting isn't so important, others editors can always help, and you can learn if this interests you. P.S: don't forget to end anything you write (except in an article) by ~ ~ ~ ~ (no space), this writes a signature and time stamp, like this: Iry-Hor (talk) 11:24, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Iry-Hor, Thanks again. Actually the reason I use sfn is just that I was imitating the footnotes that were already in. There are a few cases, where I have 2 footnotes for the same site. Is it possible, instead of having 2 footnotes, to have a single footnote that includes two reference ? It would make the text cleaner. Heagy1 (talk) 22:18, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Heagy1 Do you mean to have the same footnote referred to twice (in different places in the text)? Otherwise, what do you mean? Because for a single footnote you can put whatever you want in a footnote, however to be clear, if all you want is to put two references for a single point in the text, you can do it like this: blabla[1][2] (I mean use thw sfn template twice). If you want to write this in a footnote use the efn template: blabla[note 1] and the note 1 has: blabla[1][2]. It is better not to only put references in a footnote: a footnote should contain some text, this is why it is a footnote after all! Iry-Hor (talk) 09:06, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Iry-Hor. Would you please look at note "a" that I just added to the Narmer article. The two web references don't go to the url that I have in the note. What am I doing wrong ? Heagy1 (talk) 01:12, 15 November 2016 (UTC) Iry-Hor. Never mind , I figured it out. Thanks for all your help Heagy1 (talk) 02:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Heagy1 Sorry I just so your message, I am glad you found the solution, let me know if I can help in any way! Iry-Hor (talk) 10:01, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Iry-Hor, going back to my earlier question, what I want to do is have a single footnote, where the footnote will say AuthorA, yearA ; AuthorB,yearB, for two different articles, so I don't have to have two footnotes . This is even more of an issue when there are more than 2 articles. I have seen it on other web site, but not using the sfn format. Heagy1 (talk) 01:33, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Heagy1 In principle there is not problem having several references at the same point in the text, at least if there aren't too many of them, in which case you would only use { {sfn|A1|year|p=} }{ {sfn|A2|year2|p=} }{ {sfn|A3|year3|p=} } etc. As far as I can tell, it is not recommended to put references in a footnote unless they are references for the text appearing inside the footnote, e.g. { {efn|group=note|Text with a fact needing a reference.{ {sfn|Author|year|p= } } } }, while I have never seen { {efn|group=note|[1][2][3] } }. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't even know how to do it, another than putting the sfn templates inside of the efn. But this would give an ugly result, with a footnote comprising only things like [1][2][3]..., which I am pretty sure, goes against the MOS. Iry-Hor (talk) 09:03, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Iry-Hor I don't want to put footnote in a footnote, so that is not a problem, I'm interested in putting footnotes in the text.But , when I do what is in your example, I get 3 footnotes. What I want is 1 footnote with 3 references. I've seen that in other articles in Wikipedia, but not using sfn. Thanks for your help. Heagy1 (talk) 20:41, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Heagy1 I am still not sure what you want to do, do you want to have a footnote that looks like "^1 See references Author1, Year, p. xx and Author2, Year, p. xx" or do you want a footnote that looks like "^1 [1][2]" ? In the former case, you need { { efn|group=note| See references { {harvnb|Author1|Year|p=xx} } and { {harvnb|Author2|Year|p=xx} }, in the latter case you need { { efn|group=note| See references { {sfn|Author1|Year|p=xx} } and { {sfn|Author2|Year|p=xx} }. Note in both cases you need to have { {Reflist|group=note} } at the end of the article where you want your footnotes to appear. Iry-Hor (talk) 11:20, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Iry-Hor. What I am trying to do is have a reference ( not a note) in the form of Author1,year1,page1;author2,year2,page2. Where these are two different articles. I have seen this in other places on Wikipedia, but not using sfn. Thanks for all your help. Heagy1 (talk) 17:40, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Heagy1 Unfortunately, I don't know how to do that, furthermore I don't understand why you are not happy with two references? It is normal, standard practice to have several references in text appearing like so: [1][2] etc. Iry-Hor (talk) 20:22, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Iry-Hor. It's not a big deal, but I thought it would be a cleaner appearance. It is more of an issue when there are 4 references, but perhaps the solution to that is to use an end note , as you suggested. On a different subject, I think that to say that Aha was "probably" the son of Narmer more accurately reflects Egyptological consensus than he was " possibly" his son.. Also, the idea that Neithhotep was Narmer's daughter is conjecture based soley on the Sinai inscription. That she was Narmer's daughter is only one of several possibilities. Hence I think it would be more accurate to insert the word " possibly" in front of Neithhotp. Unless you disagree, I will make both of those changes. Heagy1 (talk) 21:27, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Heagy1 I think the best solution concerning the reference problem is an hybrid solution: if you have plenty of references to put in one place, it is indeed recommended that you avoid having them all one after the other as in [1][2][3][4]. So the solution I found when writing articles such as Djedkare Isesi is to scatter those references in the sentence(s) where the facts are to be referenced. For exemple, instead of writing "A sentence with plenty of facts, like Fact1 and Fact2 but also Fact3, needing citations.[1][2][3][4]", you write "A sentence with plenty of facts, like Fact1[1][2] and Fact2[3] but also Fact3[2][4], needing citations.[1]", that is you put the references immediately after each fact needing a citation inside the sentence. If the references aren't too many this is not really disruptive and it increases the precision of the citations (since the source of each fact can be found easily). I find this to be better than an endnote, which I use only if I want to write additional stuffs that are not essential to the main text. Concerning Narmer, Aha and Neithhotep, I am perfectly fine with the modifications that you propose: the more precise we can make the qualifications of each hypothesis (possible, likely, conjectural etc.) the better! Iry-Hor (talk) 09:00, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Iry-Hor. The problem arises when there are 4 footnotes that apply to exactly the same point. My preference would be to put them in an end note rather than having [1][2][3][4] all at one point in the text. But I think this is just a matter of personal preference. Both approaches provide the same information. Thank you for all your help. Heagy1 (talk) 21:23, 13 December 2016 (UTC).

Iry-Hor. I very much appreciate your help. I have a problem with footnotes. I added fn # 20 which is identical with fn # 7. I thought it would appear as fn # 7 again , since it is identical in content, but instead it appears as a separate footnote. How do I get the two to appear as one footnote ?Heagy1 (talk) 20:14, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Heagy1, normally the sfn template does it automatically if it detects the same entry several times (like your reference 8 for exemple). I looked up the Narmer article and saw that your entries for Quibell 1898 where slightly different, meaning that sfn could not see that they are meant to be identical. I am not 100% sure but I think the difference what that in one case you wrote "Sfn" while in the other it was "sfn". Now you can see that ref 20 and 7 have been merged and appear as 7^[a][b] at the end of the article. P.S: I just understood that we do not mean the same thing when we talk about "footnotes". When I say footnote, I specifically mean this: see here and not this. Iry-Hor (talk) 21:58, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Iry- Hor. Thanks. Wikipedia is unforgiving. But I will remember that in the future. One thing that doesn't seem to make a difference is spaces. I have tried putting in references ( your terminology) with spaces in between things like "|" and "year", and without the space, and that, at least doesn't seem to make a difference.Heagy1 (talk) 22:23, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Heagy1 Well the sfn template is unforgiving that is for sure, that is why I was gobsmacked that you actually used it for your first edits. I still think this deserves some applause. As for the spaces, it is good to know, my sfn stuffs won't be so cramped from now on. Iry-Hor (talk) 21:25, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

I am writing a footnote ( not a reference) about dating and want to refer to a reference using hrvdnb, but it has 7 authors, and the system will only let me use 4. Any way around this ?Heagy1 (talk) 02:25, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Heagy1Use the cite book/journal template as usual with your seven authors. Then the automatic anchor will only show the first four author but still works, that is you will call it in the text as follows: { {sfn|A1|A2|A3|A4|A5|A6|A7|year|p=} } and it will look like "A1, A2, A3, A4 (year), p=". Alternatively, at the end of your cite book/journal template, replace ref=harv by ref={ {harvid|} } where you can choose how you want the anchor to look like. For exemple, if you write ref={ {harvid|A1|A2|A3|A4|A5|A6|A7|year} }, then the anchor will show all the authors name and will be called in the text by { {sfn|A1|A2|A3|A4|A5|A6|A7|year|p=} } and appear as "A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7 (year), p=". Alternatively, you can use the et al. notation, e.g. ref={ {harvid|A1|et al.|year} } and the call in the text will be { {sfn|A1|et al.|year|p=} } and will appear as "A1 et al. (year), p=". Iry-Hor (talk) 13:57, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I keep using the word "reference" in the generic sense, rather than the specific Wikipedia definition. Let me be clear, I am not trying to create a reference. I have an article with 7 authors, it goes into the bibliography with no problem listing all 7. In the text, I want to say something like: According to Author1, et al,2000, Narmer never existed. And when I click on Author1 et al , 2000 it will go to the appropriate bibliography entry. I have done this successfully with {{harvdnb}} with up to 4 authors, but it doesn't work for more than 4 authors. I can always put: According to Author1 et al 2000, Narmer never existed, and not have it point to the bibliography , but that is not my preferred solution. Heagy1 (talk) 16:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Heagy1 The only way I see to solve your difficulty is to use ref={ {harvid|Author1 et al. } } in the cite book/article template so that it gives the anchor the name "Author1 et al.". If you do so, then the seven authors would still all be listed at the bottom of the page where the complete reference appears, but in the text it would appear as "Author1 et al, 2000" and would be clickable. Perhaps the following extract from the MOS has some other interesting ways of implementing this: Wikipedia:Parenthetical referencing. Iry-Hor (talk) 09:04, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I will try that Heagy1 (talk) 16:48, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

This photo from Numismatic Museum of Athens, Greece

Dear Iryhor,

This would be an interesting freely licensed (cc-by-2.0) photo to upload on WikiCommons if only there was an article to use it at. There isn't even a Wikipedia article on Tell el-Maskhuta. I have not uploaded it on Commons. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 03:32, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Leoboudv It would indeed by good to have a wikiarticle on Tell el-Maskhuta, besides I am always in favor of more photos on commons and in-wiki. Unfortunately, I have no wikipedia time these days, so I am not able to set up such an article at the moment. I will put it on my long list of stuff to do. Iry-Hor (talk) 12:52, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

• OK, Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:10, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Djedkare Isesi scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the Djedkare Isesi article has been scheduled as today's featured article for February 21, 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 21, 2017, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. I changed the lead image from your article because at the tiny scale of the TFA thumb it's hard to see the detail. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:50, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Jimfbleak Thanks for letting me know, I am looking forward to see Djedkare Isesi on the main page! Iry-Hor (talk) 10:55, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the article on "arguably the most prominent member of his dynasty, a great reformer he undertook–with dire consequences–the first reforms of the Egyptian administration and commissioned numerous trade and mining expeditions abroad"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:33, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Please don't

This isn't a good edit. Please don't. If you are bothered about BC/BCE just change that. --John (talk) 11:26, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

John Ok it seems I undid too many edits by error, I wanted to undo those of Newzild. Iry-Hor (talk) 11:59, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Request for Assessment

Hello, I noticed you are a member of WikiProject Ancient Egypt and would like to kindly request that you could assess the quality scale classes of two articles that I destubbed, if it's no bother! The articles are as follows:
Twenty-seventh Dynasty of Egypt
Twenty-eighth Dynasty of Egypt
HeathIsling 15:40, 26 February 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by HeathIsling (talk • contribs)

HeathIsling Unfortunately, I cannot do this at the moment, as I have nearly no wiki time. Furthermore, I am not good in post 1000 BCE Egyptian history. That said, you might want to ask Khruner, another member of the project who is quite knowledgeable on the 3rd intermediary and late periods. If he can't do it, I will do it, but probably not before April. Iry-Hor (talk) 17:44, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Temple of Dendur

Hi Iry-Hor, would you be interested in working (or collaborating) on Temple of Dendur as part of the new Wikipedia:GLAM/Metropolitan Museum of Art WikiProject? It's a major item in the collection and I thought it might be up your alley. czar 02:51, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Czar, unfortunately, I have next to no wiki time at the moment, and the little I have is very irregular. I cannot seriously participate in any project before April. At the very best, all I can do at the moment is small edits. Iry-Hor (talk) 17:47, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Ah, all right. But if circumstances change, be sure to send a {{ping}}! czar 17:54, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

March 2017 WikiCup newsletter

And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. It would have been 5 points, but when a late entrant was permitted to join the contest in February, a promise was made that his inclusion would not result in the exclusion of any other competitor. To achieve this, the six entrants that had the lowest positive score of 4 points have been added to the 64 people who otherwise would have qualified. As a result, some of the groups have nine contestants rather than eight. Our top four scorers in round 1 were:

• Cas Liber, last year's winner, led the field with two featured articles on birds and a total score of 674.
• Iry-Hor, a WikiCup newcomer, came next with a featured article, a good article and a tally of 282 bonus points for a score of 517. All these points came from the article Nyuserre Ini, an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh,
• 1989, another WikiCup newcomer, was in joint third place at 240. 1989 has claimed points for two featured lists and one good article relating to anime and comedy series, all of which were awarded bonus points.
• Peacemaker67 shared third place with five good articles and thirteen good article reviews, mostly on naval vessels. He is also new to the competition.

The largest number of DYKs have been submitted by Vivvt and The C of E, who each claimed for seven, and MBlaze Lightning achieved eight articles at ITN. Carbrera and Peacemaker67 each claimed for five GAs and Krishna Chaitanya Velaga was well out in front for GARs, having reviewed 32. No featured pictures, featured topics or good topics yet, but we have achieved three featured articles and a splendid total of fifty good articles.

So, on to the second round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

The Ancient Egypt Barnstar

	The Ancient Egypt Barnstar
	Your recent work on Fifth Dynasty rulers is impressive, and so are your many other contributions to the Ancient Egyptian topic area. You are a valuable asset to this project. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 17:18, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Fitzcarmalan Thank you so much, I am really happy that I could improve Ancient Egypt topics on wikipedia. One can only stand in wonder at the enormous sum of knowledge compiled here, who knows how this will ultimately shape the history of our species? I am glad I could add a drop to this ocean of wisdom. Iry-Hor (talk) 09:05, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

format queston

Iry-Hor, You may have noticed that footnote "a" in Narmer is (necessarily) long. I tried to break it into paragraphs , but when it appears in the final formant, the paragraphs disappear. Is there a way to force it to have paragraphs. Thanks for your help. Heagy1 (talk) 19:20, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Iry-Hor, I am doing a major re-do of the Reign section of Narmer. To check for format errors and typos , I have copied a draft onto my Sandbox. Everything works great except for the footnotes. I put them in using . This has worked fine in the actual Narmer page, but in the Sandbox, although it shows that there is a footnote by a superscript of "a", "b,", etc. , It doesn't show the actual text of the footnotes anywhere on the page, and when I click on the footnote indicators ( a, b, etc.), nothing happens. Is there a way for me to see the footnotes in Sandbox, or do I have to go to the actual Narmer article ? I noticed on your talk page that when I put in a footnote, it appears at the bottom of the page, unlike my Sandbox.Heagy1 (talk) 03:41, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Heagy1 Sorry for the late response, my wikipedia time has dropped to exactly 0 and will remain so until the 27th of March. I will answer all your questions then, to the best of my (limited) capabilities! Iry-Hor (talk) 09:06, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

FAC William Pūnohu White

Hello, I don't know if you came across Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/William Pūnohu White/archive1. It was closed today because of no traffic and only 1 review after a month. The quality of the article is FAC material in my opinion. I did not ask anybody (except two users) in the initial run to review it since I was trusting that it will receive reviews. Now I am asking a couple of people here and there to see if there is enough interest to renominate it again as recommended by the closing admin. I will only go ahead and renominate it once I find a few people who wants to give it a review. Please let me know if you are interested. Thanks either way.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 01:35, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

KAVEBEAR You can count me in, but only after the 27th of March. It is always a tragedy to see an article fail because of lack of reviews. This shall not stand again. I will do my best to participate in the next review when it comes up (if it is not before the 27th that is). Iry-Hor (talk) 09:08, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! It's up at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/William Pūnohu White/archive1] when you are ready. It should still be up by then. Thanks.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 16:11, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Peribsen ruled over all of Egypt!

Hi! There is something that keeps me rotating: clay seal impressions and stone vase fragments with the name of Peribsen mention two important cities: Setjet (today Sethroe) and Per-medjed (today Oxyrhynchos). Well, many Egyptologists still believe that Peribsen ruled only over Lower Egypt. But the cities of Setjet and Per-medjet are located at Upper Egypt! And, as we know, both of these cities enjoyed great importance and popularity through the whole history of Egypt. I highly doubt that Peribsen could have founded several(!) cities in a part of Egypt that allegedly did not accept him as a ruler. What do you think? Regards; --Nephiliskos (talk) 13:15, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello Nephiliskos, I am sorry I have no free time until the 27th of March so very little time to respond. I am surprised because I thought Peribsen was more of an Upper Egypt guy. Iry-Hor (talk) 13:20, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

May 2017 WikiCup newsletter

The second round of the competition has now closed, with just under 100 points being required to qualify for round 3. YellowEvan just scraped into the next round with 98 points but we have to say goodbye to the thirty or so competitors who didn't achieve this threshold; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Our top scorers in round 2 were:

• Cas Liber, led the field with five featured articles, four on birds and one on astronomy, and a total score of 2049, half of which came from bonus points.
• 1989 was in second place with 826 points, 466 of which were bonus points. 1989 has claimed points mostly relating to anime and Japanese-related articles.
• Peacemaker67 took third place with two FAs, one GA and seven GARs, mostly on naval vessels or military personnel, scoring 543 points.
• Other contestants who scored over 400 points were Freikorp, Carbrera, and Czar. Of course all these points are now wiped out and the 32 remaining contestants start again from zero in round 3.

Vivvt submitted the largest number of DYKs (30), and MBlaze Lightning achieved 13 articles at ITN. Carbrera claimed for 11 GAs and Argento Surfer performed the most GARs, having reviewed 11. So far we have achieved 38 featured articles and a splendid 132 good articles. Commendably, 279 GARs have been achieved so far, more than double the number of GAs.

So, on to the third round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2017 July newsletter

The third round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 288 points being required to qualify for round 4. It was a hotly competitive round with all but four of the contestants exceeding the 106 points that was necessary to proceed to round 4 last year. Coemgenus and Freikorp tied on 288, and both have been allowed to proceed, so round 4 now has one pool of eight competitors and one of nine.

Round 3 saw the achievement of a 26-topic Featured topic by MPJ-DK as well as 5 featured lists and 13 featured articles. PanagiotisZois and SounderBruce achieved their first ever featured articles. Carbrera led the GA score with 10, Tachs achieved 17 DYKs and MBlaze Lightning 10 In the news items. There were 167 DYKs, 93 GARs and 82 GAs overall, this last figure being higher than the number of GAs in round 2, when twice as many people were taking part. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 4, we say goodbye to the fifteen or so competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 05:38, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Precious two years!

Precious

Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:16, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt Thank you once more! Iry-Hor (talk) 08:40, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Seth Meribre and Aaqen

Long time no see Iry-Hor. I was thinking about creating an article on king Aaqen, and it would be useful to me if you could remember the source of this old statement by you, because I can't find it anywhere in von Beckerath's Handbuch, so I believe that the source is probably another work by him (my guess: maybe the Untersuchungen??) Khruner (talk) 08:44, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Khruner Well, I am still on wikipedia everyday (reading a bit) although I have no time to edit due to "real-life" commitments that typically leave me with free-time only after 21h and tired like hell. I genuinely yearn to finish Neferefre and get on with Neferirkare Kakai and will one day do so, when things clear up... So regarding Aaqen, this statement actually comes from Baker's encyclopedia of the pharaohs. He was either reporting from the Chronologie des Pharaonischen Ägypten or as you say Untersuchungen zur politischen Geschichte der Zweiten Zwischenzeit in Ägypten . I don't have access to Baker's book at the moment to check unfortunately. Iry-Hor (talk) 14:03, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

I believe I have found it, Untersuchungen pp. 53-54. Thanks! Khruner (talk) 14:35, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Khruner Great, thanks for the link! Let me know when you have put up the article on Aaqen, I will see in my sources if I can find a few more things on him. By the way, have you ever heard of Apophis II? Apparently, this king has a French and German wiki page (although the later is about a prenomen of Apophis I so not really) and has an entry as Apophis II - Aqenienre in Rice's encyclopedia, where it is stated:" Apepi II-Aqenienre (Apohis II), King, Fifteenth Dynasty, Second Intermediate Period, c. 1550 BC. After the death of APEPI I the second of the name succeeded briefly to the Hyksos’ throne. He seems to have had no authority in the south of the country, and such monuments as he left were mostly usurped from earlier kings, including two colossal statues of the Thirteenth Dynasty king SEMENKHKARE-MERMENTIFU." I find this very very dodgy as Ryholt credits the prenomen Aqenenre to Apophis I and has him succeeded directly by Khamudi and the statues of Semenkhare are said to have been usurped by Apophis I in another book. Iry-Hor (talk) 11:07, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Many authors, especially in older works, believe that there were 3 rulers with the same name Apophis, mainly because this name was found associated with 3 different throne names: Aauserre, Aaqenenre, and Nebkhepeshre. On the other hand, other authors rather believe that a single Apophis bore 3 different throne names during his life, just as Mentuhotep II did. In both cases, Aauserre is seen as the most significant by far mainly because it was found more frequently on objects from any parts of Egypt; because the only regnal year known for any Apophis is the 33rd of Aauserre (on the Rhind papyrus, quite a long reign), and because on the Carnarvon tablet is explicitly stated that Ahmose fought against "the chief of Avaris, Aauserre". Aaqenenre is less attested and mainly from Lower Egypt (noticeably, by the two usurped colossi of Imyremeshaw, which in turn were later usurped by Ramesses II), while Nebkhepeshre is a phantom if it was not for a dagger from Saqqara and little other. In both hypothesis the sequence (thus the ordinal numeration) is a matter of debate: Aaqenenre and Nebkhepeshre may find place in a short time before [the adoption of the throne name] Aauserre, as well as after (between the fall of Avaris and the accession of Khamudi). I personally believe in a single Apophis, along with Habachi, Ryholt, Schneider, Franke and others. Khruner (talk) 15:54, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Khruner Alright this clarifies it, clearly there is still lots of work to do on wiki about the Second Intermediate Period! I am now on vacations so I will try to see what I can do here and there. Iry-Hor (talk) 14:29, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2017 September newsletter

Round 4 of the WikiCup has ended and we move forward into the final round. In round 4, a total of 12 FAs, 3 FLs, 44 GAs, 3 FLs, 79 DYKs, 1 ITN and 42 GARs was achieved, with no FPs or FTs this time. Congratulations to Peacemaker67 on the Royal Yugoslav Navy Good Topic of 36 items, and the 12 featured articles achieved by Cas Liber (5), Vanamonde93 (3), Peacemaker67 (2), Adityavagarwal (1) and 12george1 (1). With a FA scoring 200 points, and bonus points available on top of this, FAs are likely to feature heavily in the final round. Meanwhile Yellow Evan, a typhoon specialist, was contributing 12 DYKs and 10 GAs, while Adityavagarwal and Freikorp topped the GAR list with 8 reviews each. As we enter the final round, we are down to eight contestants, and we would like to thank those of you who have been eliminated for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. The lowest score needed to reach round 5 was 305, and I think we can expect a highly competitive final round.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck, and let the best man (or woman) win! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 06:26, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of S 9 (Abydos)

Hello! Your submission of S 9 (Abydos) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:05, 5 September 2017 (UTC) Still needs a WP:QPQ. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:04, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for S 9 (Abydos)

On 14 September 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article S 9 (Abydos), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Egyptian tomb S9 suffered deliberate, extensive, and state-sanctioned stone- and grave-robbing? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/S 9 (Abydos). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, S 9 (Abydos)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih^Talk 00:03, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2017 November newsletter: Final results

The final round of the 2017 WikiCup is over. Congratulations to the 2017 WikiCup top three finalists:

• First Place - Adityavagarwal (submissions)
• Second Place - Vanamonde (submissions)
• Third Place - Cas Liber (submissions)

In addition to recognizing the achievements of the top finishers and everyone who worked hard to make it to the final round, we also want to recognize those participants who were most productive in each of the WikiCup scoring categories:

• Featured Article – Cas Liber (actually a two-way tie with themselves for an astonishing five FAs in R2 and R4).
• Good Article – Adityavagarwal had 14 GAs promoted in R5.
• Featured List – Bloom6132 (submissions) and 1989 (submissions) both produced 2 FLs in R2
• Featured Pictures – SounderBruce (submissions) improved an image to FP status in R5, the only FP this year.
• Featured Topic – MPJ-DK (submissions) has the only FT of the Cup in R3.
• Good Topic – Four different editors created a GT in R2, R3 and R4.
• Did You Know – Adityavagarwal had 22 DYKs on the main page in R5.
• In The News – MBlaze Lightning (submissions) had 14 ITN on the main page in R2.
• Good Article Review – Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (submissions) completed 31 GARs in R1.

Over the course of the 2017 WikiCup the following content was added or improved on Wikipedia: 51 Featured Articles, 292 Good Articles, 18 Featured Lists, 1 Featured Picture, 1 Featured Topics, 4 Good Topics, around 400 Did You Knows, 75 In The News, and 442 Good Article Reviews. Thank you to all the competitors for your hard work and what you have done to improve Wikipedia.

Regarding the prize vouchers - @Adityavagarwal, Vanamonde93, Casliber, Bloom6132, 1989, and SounderBruce: please send Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) an email from the email address to which you would like your Amazon voucher sent. Please include your preference of global Amazon marketplace as well. We hope to have the electronic gift cards processed and sent within a week.

We will open up a discussion for comments on process and scoring in a few days. The 2018 WikiCup is just around the corner! Many thanks from all the judges. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:42, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018

So the 2017 WikiCup has come to an end. Congratulations to the winner, to the other finalists and to all those who took part. 177 contestants signed up, more than usual, but not all of them submitted entries in the first round. Were editors attracted by the cash prizes offered for the first time this year, or were these irrelevant? Do the rules and scoring need changing for the 2018 WikiCup? If you have a view on these or other matters, why not join in the WikiCup discussion about next year's contest? Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Iry-Hor. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Neferefre

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Neferefre you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 16:21, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

An apologetic translation request

Hello, Iry-Hor. I'm sorry to hear that you're so short on time and energy these days. I have several more passages of French that I'd like to have translated for the Isis article. I swear this will be the last time I need anything translated for Isis, as I'm very close to finishing the article. There's no rush, though; I don't want to put any pressure on you, and I have several other things to work on in the meantime. Just let me know when is a good time to send the passages to you.

I also intend to do a lot more work on Wikipedia once the article is finished, so I'll be happy to help with anything you may need. A. Parrot (talk) 23:41, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

A. Parrot, send me the bits you want translated and I will try my best to do it in time. Having strong real-life commitments at the professional and personal levels at the moment mean that I may be slow, but for the sake of wikipedia I will try to do it! Iry-Hor (talk) 11:10, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

I sent them directly to the email address you used in 2015, because the Wikipedia email system doesn't allow formatting, which I wanted to use to make it slightly easier to tell which passages are which. If your address has changed, please let me know. If not, you should be able to find the message in your inbox using my username, which is in the subject line. Thank you once again. A. Parrot (talk) 19:51, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks I have received the email alright. It might take me some time to translate all of this, but I will do my best. Iry-Hor (talk) 07:27, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Take your time. I won't have the rest of the article ready for at least a couple of weeks.

By the way, have you been in contact with Nephiliskos? He hasn't edited since early July. I emailed him about a translation of a few paragraphs of German, but he hasn't responded so far. A. Parrot (talk) 16:04, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

A. Parrot No I haven't talked to him in a while, I barely have enough time to read wikipedia these days. Iry-Hor (talk) 07:57, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Following up on this discussion, and on an email I sent you a few days ago, I've finished writing the article. I feel reasonably confident that the passages I sent to you say what I think they say, and I'm going to upload what I have tomorrow. I'd like your confirmation that the citations are correct before I submit the article to FAC, but I'm not in a hurry to do that, so no pressure. (If you go to look for them, the quotation from Bricault is the first citation in the last paragraph of "Spread across the Mediterranean", while the quotations from Humbert and Quentin are in the last section of the article.)

I'm excited to be finishing this drawn-out writing project, and I want you to know that your translation help, and that of Nephiliskos, was invaluable. Merci beaucoup! A. Parrot (talk) 07:05, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

A. Parrot I now have some free time until early January, do you still need the translations? Iry-Hor (talk) 17:22, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, if you can spare the effort. I want to take the article to FAC, but I'm not comfortable doing so without a human translation for its sources. A. Parrot (talk) 02:13, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

A. ParrotOk no problem I have already started. Apologies for the delay so far! Iry-Hor (talk) 07:25, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

A. Parrot Done! Once again sorry for the long delay. Iry-Hor (talk) 13:32, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks! Regarding the suggestion in the email, I'm not sure what to do about it. I don't care for montages like the one in the World War II article because details are hard to see when images are shrunken horizontally, but I'd be open to a second image below the first. The long table of contents certainly leaves plenty of room for it. Unfortunately the deity infobox doesn't have a field for a second image, so I don't think you can put one in there. The deity infobox has been standard on Egyptian deity articles since before I joined the project—and infoboxes are a complicated subject. If you want to discuss the subject further, you're more than welcome to do it on the talk page (there's plenty of room there, now, too), but I imagine you have higher priorities.

Anyway, now that the translation problem is cleared up, I'll be submitting the article to review processes (possibly going straight to FAC, if that's kosher) sometime in January. I'm going to have a really busy start to the new year, but I expect it to be satisfyingly productive. I hope your new year is happy, too. A. Parrot (talk) 21:57, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

A. ParrotThanks, my suggestion was only really just that. I will write it again on the talk page since I have a bit of Wikipedia time at the moment. I will be looking forward to see Isis in FAC, I don't think there is any rule saying that an article must be GA first, so no problem. Meanwhile, I will try to have Neferefre in FAC soon as well. Iry-Hor (talk) 07:04, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Neferefre

The article Neferefre you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Neferefre for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 00:22, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Neferirkare Kakai

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Neferirkare Kakai you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mr rnddude -- Mr rnddude (talk) 12:40, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Neferirkare's pyramid (the article)

• I know you're working on the 5th Dynasty pharaohs, and was wondering if you'd mind if I did some work on Pyramid of Neferirkare. I don't know if you plan on bringing it to GA (like you did with Pyramid of Userkaf - though that was five years ago). I was just enjoying reviewing your article and haven't worked on any articles for a while, and so I thought it'd be good to actually do something article construction wise. I'll have some free time now so I can start working on it a bit. Btw, do you just go to your local (or state) library, or do you have specific access to the sources you use? Mr rnddude (talk) 14:42, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Mr rnddude This is a fantastic idea, of course you can edit whatever article you want! I am just glad somebody like you would take interest into pyramid articles on wikipedia! As you will see many such articles are neglected. Five years ago I started the Egyptian pyramid project and did some. I also assessed the state of a number of pyramid related articles, you can see this on my user page, go to the very bottom and click on the [show] button on the orange banner "Egyptian pyramids project". Some pyramids don't even have an article at all, e.g. the Pyramid of Nyuserre and until recently the Pyramid of Pepi II. Other articles are so poor it is sad, see the Pyramid of Ameny Qemau. Finally, there are good articles that need cleaning and someone willing to get them through GA and FA stages, see Pyramid of Sahure.

For the sources, I have amassed a treasure trove of pdf documents and pdf scans of books (notably the huge Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, all 3 volumes of it), which I can transfer to you. All in all I had to buy a single book on pyramids, that of Mark Lehner. I had access to the Bodleian library for a time too, which helped. Generally, if you need sources, you will surprised by the amount that can be found online these days, some are pretty amazing. In addition, you can ask to be given free subscription to access all JSTOR resources and more on the Wikipedia library, these resources are paid for by Wikipedia and given to "good" wikipedians who ask for them. If you are crazy enough you can chase images by contacting museums. This is how, with Khruner, we managed to get an image for each attested pharaoh of the 14th Dynasty, e.g. the seal of Sekheperenre, unique proof of the existence of this king and housed in the Ashmolean.

I should add that you will be suprised by how much you can get done by talking with other Wikipedians. Here is a story I will never forget: while we were working on the parents of Mentuhotep II, user Udimu managed to remember that he had read in an obscure 1906 publication about a stela, now forgotten in the basements of the Egyptian Museum, which proved that Mentuhotep II was Intef III's son. This is actually amazing because even Vivienne Gae Callender, an expert on the Egyptian Middle Kingdom, did not know about this obscure stela!Iry-Hor (talk) 16:27, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

If by Mark Lehner you're referring to "The Complete Pyramids", the entire thing has been uploaded to Internet Archive (by you?). I'm actually trying to open it now, since I was looking at Pyramid of Userkaf and figured that complete pyramids would be incomplete without Neferirkare's one, so it must be there as well. I have an e-mail for Wikipedia, so I'll let you know if there's a source I want but can't get my hands on and see if you have it. Although you're free to send me anything you might think will help me. I found a resource guide by G.D. Mumford which gives you a list of sources (it's 700+ pages long) for every period of Egyptian history. I think that will be invaluable in helping me identify good sources. I can send it through to you if you don't have it. Oh and I've updated my post on Neferefre to support and left some more work for you on the GA article. Mostly minor copy-edits, although there are two things under criterion 2c for you to look at as well. Thanks, Mr rnddude (talk) 16:45, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Mr rnddude Thank you, I will look at Neferirkare's article and review tonight to hopefully finish it up. I did not know about Lehner's book on the internet archive, I am glad to have the pdf of it now. I think the Oxford Encyclopedia is a must have as a source so I will find a way to send it to you. This cannot be by email given the size of the files though.Iry-Hor (talk) 16:58, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

• Any chance you could hook me up with: Grimal, Nicolas (1992). A History of Ancient Egypt. Translated by Ian Shaw. Oxford: Blackwell publishing. ISBN 978-0-631-19396-8. I've managed to pull up heaps of sources, but, I can't get to this one in any way. Also, don't worry about the Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. I have all three volumes of it :).

Mr rnddude Sure, I have the pdf of the book, I need your email address though. I will send it to you via a free online service because the file is too large for a direct email. Sorry for the delay on Neferirkare, I am more busy than expected. I shall try to do it today.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:01, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

No problem, my wiki e-mail is: Mrrnddude@gmail.com. Literally I just used my username to create an e-mail for Wikipedia. Thanks very much. I'm in no rush regarding Neferirkare. In fact I'd contend that the delay will be to your benefit, if you take a look at the pyramid article. Mr rnddude (talk) 09:05, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Mr rnddude I see, I think I am confused by the various statements made by Verner. He does say there were three periods of activity on the pyramid, with the first two being to make a step pyramid with 6 steps (which he calls layers depending on the source). I don't understand if he has changed his mind or if I missundertand him. This needs to be clarified indeed. I will read again his book "Forgotten pharaohs etc." also I need to re-check Lehner's book on this. At least Lehner sticks to his opinions. P>S: I have transferred Grimal's book to you via "WeTransfer". Let me know if you received it ok.Iry-Hor (talk) 17:44, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

You are not alone here. I have written and re-written various passages in the article because contradictions abound. The three stages are (as I understand them): stage 1, first six steps of the pyramid and original limestone casing; stage 2, two new steps and a 10m extension and; stage 3, granite casing. Stage 1 steps completed but not casing, stage 2 completed, and stage 3 not completed. Thanks for the transfer, I got it. Mr rnddude (talk) 19:35, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

• Ignoring the fact that I pulled all of this together in a few days, what do you think: Pyramid of Neferirkare. There's still work to do: copy-editing, clarifications, ensuring the main details have been addressed, making doubly sure that it's accurate, etc. Oh, and I got started on Pyramid of Nyuserre while I was at it. I'll have less time to do all this as the days roll on since my week will be busy. But meh. Mr rnddude (talk) 00:07, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Mr rnddude Impressive! That's a lot of good editing work you have done here, may I use some of this material to rewrite the section on the pyramid of Neferirkare in his article? This way we could finish the GA nomination.Iry-Hor (talk) 08:33, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Use anything you like :) and to be fair, I did use a lot of the sources you provided. Mr rnddude (talk) 08:50, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Mr rnddude So when you create a new article on Ancient Egypt, you need to add it to this page Index_of_ancient_Egypt-related_articles, this way it will be integrated to the Ancient Egypt wikiproject and any edit made on it will appear here. This helps fighting vandals a lot because vandalism becomes apparent to whoever patrols the watchlist of the project. I have added the pyramid of Nyuserre. I have also created a redirect from Pyramid of Nyuserre Ini to your article.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:23, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Wilco, thanks for the note. Mr rnddude (talk) 09:30, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Oh yeah, been meaning to ask, any advice on transliteration? I'll only really need it for pyramid names or what have you, but, I'd prefer to be able to confirm them myself rather than copying them across from elsewhere. However, I don't even know in which direction to read, though, I think it's right to left. I found a book on it, so I'll be going through it too. Mr rnddude (talk) 09:38, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Mr rnddude Hieroglyphs were written in all sorts of directions depending on the context. You have texts left to right, right to left and top to bottom (I haven't yet seen bottom to top but who knows). Transliterations being for use by modern scholars and having been invented by western scholars, all read left to right, just as the translations.Iry-Hor (talk) 10:17, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

• Thought I'd let you know that I've put up Neferirkare's pyramid up for GA. I've done two sweeps of the article (one backwards copy-edit and one forwards read) and I'm confident that it's up to scratch. Which reminds me, don't forget to finish up the pyramid section of your article so that I can complete the GA review, and also, Congratulations on Neferefre's FA pass. Mr rnddude (talk) 01:50, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Mr rnddude Thanks for the indication, I will now read the pyramid article in details and then open the GA review if you agree. Also I have rewritten the pyramid section in Neferirkare Kakai.Iry-Hor (talk) 12:56, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Neferirkare Kakai

The article Neferirkare Kakai you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Neferirkare Kakai for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mr rnddude -- Mr rnddude (talk) 23:41, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Sheshi for TFA

Thank you for Maaibre Sheshi, "an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh during the Second Intermediate Period. Sheshi is the best attested king of this time period in terms of the number of artefacts attributed to him and yet Egyptologists cannot agree on any single thing regarding him beyond his name. Hence the dynasty, chronological position, duration of reign and extent of rule of Sheshi are highly uncertain and the object of a strong ongoing debate in Egyptology. These issues are closely intertwined with the arrival of the Hyksos in Egypt and thus of paramount importance in understanding the sequence of events associated with the fall of the Middle Kingdom c. 1700 BCE."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:53, 1 March 2018 (UTC)