Talk:Nekhen

Untitled
paige wilson lives in logan ut —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.202.24.2 (talk) 00:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Main deposit (Nekhen)
It would seem logical that the content related to a single archaeological deposit would be better described as part of the article on the main site. PatHadley (talk) 20:09, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree. If this article were very lengthy, there might be a reason to have a separate article on the Main Deposit, but instead it's fairly short. The contents of the Main Deposit are undoubtedly the best-known finds from Nekhen (the Narmer Palette is almost certainly the best-known artifact from the Predynastic and Early Dynastic Periods) and deserve more detailed coverage here than they get. The palette and the two maceheads already have their own articles, so there's really no reason to have a separate Main Deposit article that further isolates Nekhen from the most important finds in Nekhen. A. Parrot (talk) 22:55, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

proposal to use the Egyptian name
I have edited the article for many minor changes and propose that we shift to using the Ancient Egyptian name consistently for the site, as our article is entitled, not switching back and forth between it and the name used by the ancient Greeks. A redirect is in place for Hierakonpolis and it is noted three times at the top of the article as an alternative name, so that should suffice for references to that name.

In case there is no objection, I went ahead and made the changes that would be required. Please do not reverse all of the edits if there is not -- I will restore the Greek name where I have changed it if that is the consensus. _ _ _ _ 83d40m (talk) 19:45, 27 June 2020 (UTC)