User talk:Khruner/Archive 5

Happy New Year!

Hi, Khruner! A happy new year and all good things to you and to your family and friends! May your Ka shine, your Ba thrive and your Ach be enlighted all year long! Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 15:37, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy celebrations to you, Nephiliskos, and thanks for the kind Egypt-themed wishes! :) Khruner (talk) 17:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Yayy!^^ Say, where do you come from, anyway? I'm so curious! Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 17:37, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Oh, I thought you knew I'm a southron :) I was born and still live in Bologna, Italy, and I seem to recall that you are from Rhineland-Palatinate. Khruner (talk) 17:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Ooh, from Bologna! I've been only once in Italy, at the archaeological site of Pompeji! Really creepy... But the olive hains and the beaches are marvellous! Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 18:01, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

The motherload

Hello Khruner, so Juan R. Lazaro is back on FlickR see here. J. Lazaro is seemingly an amateur photographer who went/goes to Egypt regularly, however he has a remarkably talented eye for unusual things. Back in 2012 I obtained from him tons of photos of pretty rare stuff like the stela of Snaaib, the pyramidion of Khendjer, vessels of Nynetjer, a statue of Neferefre etc. But he has much much more things on his account, like photos of the saff tombs on the 11th Dynasty, photos of mastabas of high officials (e.g. he has 6 photos of the mastaba of Isesi ankh, pretty much the only photos of this mastaba that I could find on the web!). I am in contact with him and he said he would be happy to temporarily release all copyrights on the photos we want so we can upload them (the way it works is, he only needs to release the rights the time it takes for us to upload and for the wiki commons bot to check as only the rights at the time of upload are relevant). Would you be interested in going through his (huge) pile of photos and tell me whatever photos you would like to see on wikipedia? This way, I will send him a detailed list of which photos to release the rights on. Iry-Hor (talk) 11:15, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello Iry-Hor, yes I remember many valuable pictures taken by him; glad to hear that he is willing to do that. I'll scan his gallery asap but you know that I'm not so proficient in anything before the 10th Dynasty! Khruner (talk) 14:34, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

The pictures of early dynastic objects are marvellous, Lazaro even gives sources and literatures for princes and princesses! Some of them were unknown even to me! That's bitchin', I gonna check out the books and write some shorties about these persons asap! Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 14:38, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Iry-Hor, Nephiliskos Before choosing, check the caption carefully. Most of the pics were made by mr. Lazaro and also some drawings too, but I have already found few pics and drawings actually coming from copyrighted publications: in that case, he obiously can't change the copyright status even temporarily. Khruner (talk) 15:33, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Khruner: do not worry. ;o) As I said, I'm gonna check the mentioned sources. If we need pics, I'm gonna draw some. ;P Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 15:37, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Khruner Nephiliskos the point is to find the pictures you like and give me a list. If the copyright holder is Juan R. Lazaro, then I will ask him to release the copyright for the duration of the upload process. Obviously, drawings and photos from the litterature don't fit in that scheme. Just tell me what you would like to see on wiki commons! Iry-Hor (talk) 18:04, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Khruner apparently the review process for FlickR pictures got a tad more complicated, the bot reviewed the first pictures fine but it needs a human confirmation, see e.g. here from a picture of the mastaba of Isesi-ankh. Since these human confirmations are super slow (being made on a voluntary basis by people with reviewer right) and since I would like to tell J. Lazaro asap that he can put the copyrights back on his pics in FlickR, I would like to ask of Khruner a big favor: could you become of License reviewer on wikicommons? Let me explain: it does not take anything special, you only need to nominate yourself and your case will be decided in 2 days see here. I would do it myself however I would then not be authorized to review my own uploads, i.a. those from J. Lazaro's account. If you become a reviewer you could then give the green light for Lazaro's pics that I upload (this consists only in removing a tag "need for review" in the picture page on commons). I understand that this is a lot to ask, so there is absolutely no problem if you prefer not to do that. Iry-Hor (talk) 20:39, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Well, I frankly prefer not to do that... I was going to advise but to ask to Leoboudv who is an active Commons reviewer, but it seems from your talk page that you two are already in contact. I will make a stripped down selection of pics, I don't want to overwork anyone. Khruner (talk) 23:51, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Ok no worries! Let me know when you have selected the photos that interest you. Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Here are all the photos: Intef I, II, Mentuhotep II, Amenemhat I, Senusret I, Amenemhat II, Amenemehat III, Amenemhat III again, Amenemhat IV, Amenemhat IV again, Sobekneferu (I made an error in the name of the file so it will be moved to the new correct name soon), Sobekhotep I, Sobekhotep IV, Khnumibre (I have no idea who this king is), Xerxes I. Let me know if there are more photos you would like to have as J. Lazaro is very receptive. Iry-Hor (talk) 13:24, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Wonderful Iry-Hor, thanks for all the work! The mysterious king Khnumibre Ahmose-saneith, is no other than the hellenised Amasis, quite a character. EDIT: oh, Iry-Hor I'd like to hear your opinion about the plaquette of the supposedly heirless Amenemhat IV and the "prince Ameny". Khruner (talk) 12:54, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

I am glad we can get so many photos from him! About Amenemhat IV, actually Ryholt argues that Sekhemrekhutawy Sobekhotep and Mehibtawy Sekhemkare Amenemhat Sonbef were both sons of Amenemhat IV, in this reasoning, prince Ameny could be the future Sobekhotep I and the mystery rests in why there is a division 12th/13th dynasty (and we could imagine Sobekneferu's reign similarly to Hatshepsut's). Ryholt argues that the transition 12th-13th dynasty is due to the rise of the 14th dynasty in the delta but many Egyptologists feel this is too early for the 14th dynasty to appear, so it remains unclear why there is a division 12th/13th dynasty in Manetho. Iry-Hor (talk) 09:10, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

←| Probably only Ryholt believes such a thing. It seems that the rule of a female pharaoh was a shock enough to consider his reign as a turning point, just like the Manethonian Nitocris maybe (but, notably, not Hatshepsut). Khruner (talk) 16:43, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Well Nitocris was a king for that matter: it seems that Ryholt's arguments on that matter have convinced many egyptologist that Nitocris = Netjerkare Siptah (although Manetho may have believed otherwise). Iry-Hor (talk) 20:27, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Problems with Inykhnum

Some overeager user keeps reverting my update on Inykhnum. I simply updated, emended and actualized the article after standards like Penebui, Sehener and such. Would you help me out here? Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 09:04, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Nephiliskos ok, but you should talk with him/her first in order to get an agreement. Khruner (talk) 09:10, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I'll try. I'm just updating our articles about early dynastic nobles and officials into normed standards. I think that my current form of sections give the best and most tidy overview and informations possible. --Nephiliskos (talk) 09:15, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't think it will be so easy, if you both have valid arguments for adopting one infobox rather than another. Probably for these cases there are no rules besides common sense, but if you don't find an agreement you should contact an administrator, although even then I don't know whether he/she can be decisive. Khruner (talk) 09:24, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Maybe this topic should be discussed on our project site. I don't really mind about the infobox, I rather care about the new article design system (sections, chapters, distributing informations). And about the hard work, that was reverted without any comment and reasoning. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 09:34, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Then consider starting a new talk on the project, maybe an agreement on a future guideline could be reached. Khruner (talk) 09:40, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

I tried something. I couldn't put it better, srry. See here. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 10:46, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Back in business!^^

My new creation: Inventory Stela. ;) Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 17:40, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Nice work, never heard of this stela before! I found a pic on Commons but I got beat for mere minutes, and corrected a few dabs. Khruner (talk) 18:36, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Amenemhat (BH2)

Hello Khruner, looking at recent edits in the Egypt wikiproject watchlist, I saw your edit to Amenemhat (BH2). I believe we should rename this article to something more comprehensible like Amenemhat (nomarch) instead of (BH2) which looks as much as a chemical formula (dihydrogen bromide?) as anything. What do you think? Iry-Hor (talk) 12:37, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, that would be Boron rather than Bromine, but I don't think such a chemical compound (BH2) could exist at all. Anyway, yes I remember of having problems in naming this article mainly because I believe there are at least two different nomarchs named Amenemhat. So, in order to avoid a title like "Amenemhat (nomarch at Beni Hasan)" or "Amenemhat/Ameny", I put his tomb denomination instead. A better name could be found indeed, but what we could find for Djehutynakht (10A)? Khruner (talk) 13:00, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Right, so you are saying that for Amenemhat there were several nomarchs by that name (is that also true for Djehutynakht?, if not we could use Djehutynakht (nomarch)). I think that a title like "Amenemhat (nomarch, 16th nome)" would be better than Amenemhat (BH2) which really looks mysterious (I guess even more so for readers not accustomed to tomb numbers). Furthermore, some tombs have several numbering/names depending on the scholar and it seems very unlikely that someone looking for Amenemhat the nomarch of the 16th nome would think of googling Amenemhat (BH2). Now a further problem could arise if there were several Amenemhat nomarchs of the 16th nome. Given the time span of ancient Egypt it is quite possible. If so then I would still advocate something long like "Amenemhat (nomarch, 16th nome, 12th Dynasty)" rather than Amenemhat (BH2) but we could put that to a vote. P.S: well spotted regarding the boron/bromide, and to think that I took some chemistry classes years ago.... Iry-Hor (talk) 13:51, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Though I usually dislike long titles, I agree on "Amenemhat (nomarch, 16th nome)" because he is the only known Amenemhat in the Oryx nome (another one is known in the Hare nome). Djehutynakht is more troublesome, at least six of them ruled the Hare nome (see here) and, while they are numbered, our Djehutynakht may have been both the fourth and the fifth of them. So we can call him "Djehutynakht (nomarch, Boston MFA)" or something similar. Khruner (talk) 14:49, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I am not sure what to do about the troublesome Djehutynakht: again I think that a reader that has not yet read the article, would find it very hard to know what "Boston MFA" is meant to mean in this title. A reader not acquainted to the museum and to its acronym would have additional troubles (furthermore, what if some artefacts belonging to him are on display in another museum?). Thus I would still prefer an uncertain numbering as in "Djehutynakht IV (nomarch)" or simply "Djehutynakht IV" with an additional redirect, e.g. from "Djehutynakht V" to "Djehutynakht IV" with some explanations in the article. We might want to consult Udimu on the subject. Iry-Hor (talk) 17:52, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

@Iry-Hor: Fine with me, so let's ping @Udimu:. PS: did you receive the Wikipedia email I sent to you some time ago? Khruner (talk) 18:02, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi there. I think "Amenemhat (nomarch, 16th nome)" and so on, might be the best. Amenemhat is such as common name, although it seems that he is the only nomarch with this name, so "Amenemhat (nomarch)" might work too. I think the nomarchs at Bersheh should be just numbered: "Djehutynakht V" or "Djehutynakht IV". best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 05:56, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

◅ So I moved Amenemhat. About Djehutynakht (10A), maybe the best way is to move him to a lapidary "Djehutynakht" since I believe it's unlikely that someone will create articles for all the other Djehutynakhts that are far less known and relevant. PS: Udimu, there is another Amenemhat in the Hare nome, so I moved "Amenemhat" to "Amenemhat (nomarch, 16th nome)"; I don't want to repeat the errors I did when I created "Khety I (nomarch)" and "Khety II (nomarch)", because there is at least another nomarch called Khety, but in the Oryx nome. Khruner (talk) 08:08, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Nice thanks, for Djehutynakht we can always move it later to "Djehutynakht IV" if someone creates further Djehutynakht articles. Who knows? Iry-Hor (talk) 08:40, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Re: Settipani

Hi Khrumer -- I'll admit that I'm probably being overcritical of S., but my concern about using him as a source is based on that fact that a banned user had spammed a few hundred articles by tacking S.'s books to the "Source" section, & my removal is based on undoing some of that spam. That act had the effect of making him appear to be an authority & his works appear to be standard references on those historical periods. Where S. had been integrated into the article -- or was the only source provided for the article -- I left his name alone. By "integrated", I mean that either his opinion was mentioned in the text of the article, or his work was cited in a footnote. And where his name appeared as the only source for that article, I didn't want the article to be flagged as "unsourced" & possibly deleted so I left it knowing eventually someone will come up with a better source to replace S. If someone can cite one of his books by page number, I have no problem with S. being restored, or added, to any article. IMHO, it would be best if when he (& many other authors) is cited in an article, it is done in a way to show this is S.'s opinion, not established consensus or received truth. (Which was the aim of that banned user.) Does that explain my view on Settipani? -- llywrch (talk) 16:27, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

DNA history of Egypt & IP hopper

This is getting tiresome. And I can't protect the page as I'm too involved editing it. Doug Weller talk 18:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

I didn't know about this rule, but the page needs protection in some ways. Khruner (talk) 18:33, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

He's at 3RR now and has been warned. I reverted twice and don't want to hit 3RR. Protection can be requested at WP:RPP. Doug Weller talk 20:25, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Sorry I was out for a beer, hopefully done here. Khruner (talk) 21:22, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Looks like it is. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 07:42, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Cornelius Gallus

You said: Hello. I restored the original source that you deleted without giving a reason, as Cornelius Gallus's birthplace is clearly a matter of debate among scholars. Khruner (talk) 11:06, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello. where is your evidence that Forum Livii (Forlì) was ever his birthplace??? There is no dispute amongst scholars about this, Forum Julii has only ever been the place. The only slight doubt was if this was Frejus or Cividale del Friuli, but the former is accepted by virtually everyone.Rjdeadly (talk) 13:55, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Rjdeadly, the source is exactly that one you deleted and it was also accompanied with a quote, and you still have not provided a valid reason for its deletion. Since different reliable sources gives different birthplaces, it is clearly a disputed matter, also check the discussion in the talk page, and please provide a better source for the Britannica, i.e. chapters and/or pages, because this undermines the source's reliability. Khruner (talk) 14:21, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

The source you refer to dates from 1826!!. So hardly one of the scholars of today! It was writing the story of Forli, no doubt misreading the text for its aggrandisement.

The only original text is from Jerome: Chronicles, Olympiad 188.17 (27 BC):

"Cornelius Gallus Foroiuliensis poeta, a quo primum Aegyptum rectam supra diximus, XLIII aetatis suae anno propria se manu interficit".

Note that in Latin "Foroiuliensis" means "of Forum Julii". No serious scholar denies this, as you can see in many references. Any use of "Forli" is an error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjdeadly (talk • contribs) 15:09, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Yuya

That section is a mess, edited and reedit end, Osman's book, which shouldn't be used, moved around, etc,. Will fix it tomorrow as I have found where it came from, might be copyvio. Doug Weller talk 18:23, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: I'm not much into the New Kingdom stuff, but I can try to help with my sources. Not sure about what I can do with the Joseph section, though. And the IP who put the horse-thing is now a registered user and keeps putting his edit. Khruner (talk) 21:33, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Chinese burial mounds aren't pyramids but are added to pyramid tmplate

See [[1]. Can you help? Doug Weller talk 05:28, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Doug Weller I never considered that the mausoleum of Shi Huangdi wouldn't fit so well among the other structures of the comparison image, but if we see it on the basis of the shape rather than that of the function (as suggested by the presence of the Louvre pyramid, Las Vegas etc), I guess that it makes sense. Are you suggesting to ask for its removal, something like a Bosnian "pyramid" that used to be in the image too? Anyway, I think we should wait for the editor's reply; he looks experienced and will hopefully understands this point of view. Khruner (talk) 09:53, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

I agree, we'll wait. If we used function then I think we'd include things such as cairns, long barrows, etc, most any structure in Category:Burial monuments and structures. Doug Weller talk 10:39, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

I seem to be wrong about the Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor. Although the article doesn't or rather didn't until a minute ago mention the shape of the mound covering the mausoleum, it's a truncated pyramid. I've reverted myself and left a new note for the editor, and will source the article later. Doug Weller talk 11:45, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Range block

Hi, Kruhner. I noticed you were asked at ANI to keep a list of IPs related to 124.106.246.131 and 124.106.247.19 in case you noticed similar vandalism. I took a look at the range 124.106.246.0/23, which covers the two of them, and there was actually plenty of similar vandalism from other IPs in the range, see [2]. I've blocked the range for a couple of weeks, just thought you might like to know. Bishonen | talk 03:06, 20 July 2016 (UTC).

Bishonen actually I was lucky to find the user twice since he disrupted two articles in my watchlist, but this IP-range checker would be far more efficient. Thanks for linking me this and for blocking the IP-range. Khruner (talk) 06:43, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it's a great tool! If you ever need to find contributions of an IPv6 range, you can use Template:IP range calculator. Bishonen | talk 07:27, 20 July 2016 (UTC).

BTW he is a hell of a disruptor, I just reverted at least 40 older crappy edits by him. Hoping for a longer block if needed. Khruner (talk) 10:08, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Bishonen The disruptor is distupting again from 124.106.245.216, the block should be extended to 245 too. I'm tired of reverting this useless editor.. Khruner (talk) 16:11, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Oh, we’re actually in luck, it’s still only a /22 range, so I can block it. Done. If it gets any bigger, we may be in trouble. Bishonen | talk 22:00, 26 July 2016 (UTC).

Thanks

I knew it needed a lot of tuning. Ran out of time. Typing this while on my exercise bike watching tv with my wife Doug Weller talk 19:01, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome, glad to read an article by you, finally! Khruner (talk) 19:15, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Hatsepsut

If you're around and have time, could you look at my recent reversion and comments on the editor's talk page? I haven't read his reply carefully yet due to RL and am off to bed now, planning to do that tomorrow, but another editor's view might be useful. I think there's just a learning problem here, not like a couple of other editors I've been dealing with these last 2 days! Doug Weller talk 20:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello Doug, almost off to bed too, but let's see. Editor looks good-faithed and good-willing to me. About Peter Roberts, I guess that the fact that his books aren't RS superseeds all the copypaste discussion. For the latter issue, editor could find useful reading Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources. I am also somewhat suspicious about Hatshepsut, Queen of Sheba by Emmet Scott, and there is an entire paragraph about Velikovsky inside it. I'm unhappy as you are about the Egyptian boat source for the important claim that Thutmose III is regarded as one of the most successful pharaohs: while it is true, many better sources supporting such claim could be found. Bradley seems ok but I believe the paragraph about the interpretations of Hatshepsut should be written in a much better form. I agree with you on all the rest. I was not sure about Kerr, but can't doubt your greater experience into hunting down unreliable sources! Khruner (talk) 22:02, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the Middle Kingdom edit

I get it's not Egyptian...but Obsolete? Dizzzer (talk) 01:41, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello there, maybe I did not use the best word and the meaning could have been twisted. Back to the days when Biblical archaeology was the undisputed standard and Joseph's historicity was unquestioned, it was believed by someone that the unnamed pharaoh who elevated him to the rank of vizier was a Senusret (I don't remember which one, probably the third who is one of the best known ruler of the Middle Kingdom). Since nowadays the consensus is that Joseph is a character of narrative/fiction, hence my "obsolete" in reference to the claimed Joseph-Senusret relationship. Khruner (talk) 16:23, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Khruner. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho

Doug Weller talk is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec16a}} to your friends' talk pages.

Happy New Year, Khruner!

Happy New Year!

Khruner,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Donner60 (talk) 08:41, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.