Wikipedia:Peer review/Tomb of Kha and Merit/archive1

Tomb of Kha and Merit

I've listed this article for peer review because I intend nominate it for Featured Article candidacy this year. I want to check that it reads well to someone with no knowledge of the subject, identify areas that are too detailed or not detailed enough, and to check for close paraphrasing/plagiarism.

Thanks for your time, Merytat3n (talk) 02:01, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Comments from Teratix

I went to a touring museum exhibit on Ramesses the Great a few months ago but apart from that, not much knowledge on ancient Egypt. In this review, I have focused on noting parts that didn't make sense on a first read or seemed to contradict other parts of the article. In the second half I also noted a general tendency to use quotations that should be either attributed or rewritten in original language. I have avoided listing problems in prose unless they interfere with the reader's ability to understand what is being said, as this will no doubt be done more thoroughly at FAC.

• Of unknown background, he rose to this position through skill this seems a pretty definitive statement but the body is much more tentative, saying it has only been inferred from his lack of hereditary titles

 Done More tentative like body text

• The couple's pyramid-chapel was known since at least 1824 but the body says Drovetti's agents had purchased the stele around 1818?

 Done Swapped to mention Drovetti date

• indicating it was one of the oldest chapels in the cemetery you don't explicitly call Deir el-Medina a cemetery so it wasn't immediately clear to me what was referred to here

 Done Made it clearer that Deir el-Medina is a village and has a cemetery

• This separation contributed to its survival, allowing the entrance to be quickly buried by debris this doesn't make much sense until you read the article body and get the context that other tombs were later excavated higher up the cliffs. And the article suggests robbers were the main threat, but "survival" makes it sound more like natural disintegration was the problem.

 Done Reworded

• It has been on display in the Museo Egizio in Turin since its arrival and has been redisplayed several times how can something be on display since arrival (implying continuity) and also "redisplayed several times"? I think you mean the exhibition has been reworked.

 Done

• sometimes suggested to be that of father and son but earlier the article said Iuy was known to be Kha's father, so why would this be a possibility for Neferhebef?

 Done Removed

• His position as "royal scribe" is debated as it only appears on two staves I would just use "staffs" here like you do in the next sentence (I was looking up what a "stave" was before I realised :))

 Done

• pointing to the many grammatical errors in texts in both the chapel and tomb is the implication here that if Kha had been a scribe, he would have noticed these errors while his tomb was being constructed?

 Done Yes that's the implication but I made it clearer

• Merit II became a singer of Amun what's a singer? Some form of worshipper?

 Done Swapped to priestess with a different source

• As of 2008, it is not open to tourists this date is cited to a 2015 reprint of a 1998 book, which doesn't make much sense to me.

 Done Just saying it is not open to tourists

• a small relieving chamber was probably present above what's a relieving chamber?

 Done I never define it so I have removed it

• Unlike the rest of the decoration, this is executed on a light grey ground background?

 Done

• receive ministrations from a man receiving?

 Done

• towards a seated couple who are now mostly obliterated by damage any theories on their identity?

 Not done None of the sources I have speculate on who they are :( Could conceivably be Kha's parents or Neferhebef and Taiunes but would be WP:OR without a source.

• The name of the god Amun was erased wherever it occurred during the reign of Akhenaten. would be helpful to mention Akhenaten's promotion of monotheism to explain his antagonism to Amun.

 Done Added

• You use the passive voice perhaps too extensively in the Discovery section

 Done I tried to make it more active : )

• "and an immediate exclamation of joy on his part assured us that our hopes would not be dashed" clarify who is narrating here

 Done Reworked this section

• Weigall was the first to enter the room this paragraph contains many uncontextualised quotes that could be rewritten as original prose or attributed

 Done Reworked this paragraph and attributed the remaining quote.

• leading to confusion regarding the positioning of objects not included in the unpublished plan or seen in photographs this could use elaboration – which objects?

 Done Specified

• the oils mentioned by Schiaparelli are a "perfumed moisturizing treatment meant to keep the hair in good condition" this could be rewritten without the need for a quote

 Done Rewritten

• "a more varied and plentiful assortment than has been discovered in any other tomb or exists in any museum" I would either rewrite this, or, if you prefer, attribute to Schiaparelli

 Done Attributed

• "superb examples" of the wealth and craftsmanship seen during the reign of Amenhotep III attribute

 Done Attributed

• "the face, hands, alternate stripes of the wig, bands of inscriptions and figures of funerary gods in gilded gesso" could be rewritten as original prose

 Done Rewritten

• leading to the suggestion that it may be the longer, outermost strand unclear what "it" refers to here

 Done Clarified

• Attribute the blockquote in Merit's section

 Done Removed it instead

• "perfectly conserved and as supple as if recently made" attribute or rewrite

 Done Attributed

• unique within the known Eighteenth Dynasty examples for including Chapter 175 what is chapter 175's significance?

 Done Removed instead. Average reader doesn't know what it is and I couldn't line up the content the source said with the content of the papyrus

• a similar imbalance is seen in the burial of Yuya and Thuya who were Yuya and Thuya? link or explain further

 Done Explained

• I have been reviewing quite a few articles recently but I have to say this was the most fascinating to read, a mesmerising subject, very well illustrated. I recommend any further reviewers also watch the virtual reconstruction of the tomb (first external link), very helpful in getting your bearings in terms of how everything was arranged. Overall, although I would not say the article is precisely FA standard, to this non-expert's eye it is certainly extremely close, and I would consider it ready for FAC. – Teratix ₵ 14:48, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your comments! I will start working through the issues raised : ) Merytat3n (talk) 20:23, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks again for your comments Teratix! I think I have (extremely slowly) addressed everything raised so I will close the review Merytat3n (talk) 01:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)