Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ancient Near East/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Articles for the Wikipedia 1.0 project

Hi, I'm a member of the Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using these criteria, and we are looking for A-Class and good B-Class articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles on the Ancient Near East? The Ancient Egypt group have already provides a useful list. I don't know if you've had any FAs, but they would be suitable as well. Please post your suggestions here. Cheers, Walkerma 04:00, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Naming convention

A Wikipedia: Naming convention is needed for the ancient Near East! --JFK 08:28, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

On Near East - Middle East - Orient. "Orient" is ambiguous, since it is often (in Britain more often) used for the Far East than the Near East. "Middle East" is not liked by archaeologists because it has a political flavour (not necessarily a good argument against it though?). And it is true that "Near East" is now generally preferred (for instance, the Department of Western Asiatic Antiquities at the British Museum a few years ago changed its name to Department of the Ancient Near East). However, it might be pointed out that "Near East" (as also "Middle East") is a Euro-centric term and might in the future come to be considered politically incorrect. Personally I would prefer "South West Asia". The use of this term would necessarily have to exclude Egypt, but Egypt would in my view be better recognised as an advanced culture of Africa - which it is - rather than being lumped together with Eurasia (as if only Eurasia could produce "high civilisations"). User:Shulgi 16:53, 9 December 2006

Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 16:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Stablepedia

Beginning cross-post.

See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 03:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

End cross-post. Please do not comment more in this section.

Vault (architecture)

I've imported the 1911 entry for the above article as a base to build the rest of the article upon. I need to check some of the factual accuracy of the historical claims. Firstly:-

"The earliest known example of a vault is a Tunnel vault found under the Sumerian ziggurat at Nippur in Babylonia, ascribed to about 4000 B.C., which was built of burnt bricks cemented with clay mortar.[1] The earliest tunnel vaults in Egypt are those at Requagnah and Denderah, c. 3500 B.C.; these were built in unburnt brick in three rings over passages descending to tombs: in these cases, as the span of the vault was only 6 ft., the bricks constituting the voussoirs were laid flatwise, and adhered sufficiently to those behind to enable the ring to be completed without other support; in the granaries built by Ramesses II., still in part existing behind the Ramesseum, at Thebes, the span was 12 ft., and another system was employed; the lower part of the arch was built in horizontal courses, up to about one-third of the height, and the rings above were inclined back at a slight angle, so that the bricks of each ring, laid flatwise, adhered till the ring was completed, no centering of any kind being required; the vault thus formed was elliptic in section, arising from the method of its construction."

The 4000 B.C. claim seems perhaps too early, but I can't find a different source that says otherwise. Also, there seems no mention of Requagnah at all on google so I think perhaps it is now known by a different name or spelling. Can anyone help? --Mcginnly | Natter 16:18, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Almost certainly that source operates under the mistaken assumption that the first dynasty began around 4100 BC. Thus it dates those vaults to a few hundred years after 4100. I can't necesarrily find for you the correct date, but I know for a fact that 1) no monumental tombs were built around 3500 and 2) 3500 is possibly still late Naqada I period, and therefore there were no little to no bricks around whatsoever. Thus, that article is really out of date. Thanatosimii 17:37, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I take it your answer refers to the egyptian dating - do you have any comments on the Sumerian Nippur date (I note the nippur article also refers to arch/vault features, but also references the 1911 britannica and so may be repeating the error). Could anyone take a stab at the Requagnah question? Cheers. --Mcginnly | Natter 18:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 20:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)