Talk:Libyan Palette

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ancient Egypt Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egyptological subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient EgyptTemplate:WikiProject Ancient EgyptAncient Egypt articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Ancient Egypt to-do list:

Needed articles.

We should have an article on every pyramid and every nome in Ancient Egypt. 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.

confusing

This article is sometimes confusing, almost to the point of being unintelligible (especially the Modern Betrò hieroglyph text: "City Plan" hieroglyph section). Original research?--Dipa1965 (talk) 21:18, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That section was beyond repair, so I went ahead and deleted it. As for the rest of the article... I wouldn't mind deleting everything below the lead section too, except the last paragraph of the "Iconography" section. Or would that be too radical? Rest is either non-encyclopedic, original research, badly written or just plain rubbish IMO.--WANAX (talk) 23:53, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding. So it was not only me. I will proceed with what you suggested you suggested, also keeping the sentence I added about the word "Libya".--Dipa1965 (talk) 05:51, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just made other fixes as well. Please copy-edit if you can.--Dipa1965 (talk) 06:38, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of the 1st articles I made for the category (my creation) Category:Ancient Egyptian palettes. Since Betro used this for "city-plan"....please don't disparage the author.!. .... And I have later renamed the hieroglyph: Townsite-city-region (hieroglyph)Mmcannis (talk) 18:14, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The issue here was that the deleted text was essentially incomprehensible. Exactly what did Betro say about this palette? (do you have a page number?) In any case, original research is not acceptable in WP and I think we had a lot of it in the old version of the article.--Dipa1965 (talk) 21:14, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Libyan Palette. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:48, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]