Talk:Prehistoric Egypt

Grammar and Language
"The vast majority of Predynastic archaeological finds have been in Upper Egypt, because the silt of the Nile River was more heavily deposited at the Delta region, completely burying most Delta sites long before modern times.[1]" though useful, is another example of syntax and comfortable language seamlessly making concepts of Upper and Lower Egypt confusing to intuition. A better statement could be made with a reference footnote such as: "The vast majority of Predynadtic arcahelogical finds have been in Upper Egypt." Aside from language concerns, and the quasi-academic grammar of the quoted reference, the "because" statement presumes sites existed of any significance which could be excavated. The statement is opinion, not empirical fact, misleading, and confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.73.92.28 (talk) 03:40, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Stone tool technologies (Illustrations)
Many casual, non-specialist readers will be quite unfamiliar with the specifics of the various stone-tool technologies referred to in this article. It would be extremely useful if this omission could be remedied, by the inclusion of appropriate additional illustrations and/or cross-referencing to other articles. 86.183.237.37 (talk) 17:18, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Genetic/ Morphological Connections Between Fayum and the Near East
Dont know where to put this but someone has sabotaged the page - this section "However, some morphological and post-cranial data has linked the earliest farming populations at Fayum, Merimde, and El-Badari, to Near Eastern populations" - should say LOCAL populations, not near eastern ones. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.155.226.109 (talk) 13:35, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi there, the citations at... ... don't appear to support the claim that : Studies based on morphological [and] genetic ... data have attributed these settlements to migrants from the Fertile Crescent in the Near East returning during the Egyptian and North African Neolithic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.191.237.229 (talk) 11:00, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * 22 - Clines of nuclear DNA markers suggest a largely Neolithic ancestry of the European gene pool
 * 21 - Paleolithic and Neolithic Lineages in the European Mitochondrial Gene Pool
 * 20 - Origin, Diffusion, and Differentiation of Y-Chromosome Haplogroups E and J: Inferences on the Neolithization of Europe and Later Migratory Events in the Mediterranean Area
 * 17- The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form

Nabta Playa is in Lower Nubia not Upper Egypt.
Nabta Playa is in modern-day Egypt but not within the borders of ancient Egypt. It's in Lower Nubia not Upper Egypt. Should it even be included on this page? If it is, it shouldn't be in the Upper Egypt section. Ario1234 (talk) 14:45, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Undue weight
a single account wikiuser4020 has been adding sources that give undue weight to discredited racialist theories about the ancient Egyptians id direct opposition to the scholarly consensus to numerous articles about ancient Egypt they have cherrypicked from a small group of heterodox scholars to give their views credibility and as an expert in this field I cannot allow this to stand. 75.131.101.131 (talk) 00:38, 19 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Discredited by whom? Where? What opposition exactly are you referring to? 'As an expert' by itself is meaningless: you cannot cite yourself. Please explain why the sources added give undue weight to a viewpoint, not just that they do. WhoAteMyButter  ( 🌇talk │ 🍂contribs ) 02:03, 19 November 2023 (UTC)


 * for one they rely heavily on deeply flawed studies treating skeletal anthropometry as a reliable determinator of ancestry and ethnicity when mainstream anthropology has moved past those methods since they are generally considered unreliable. Inserting criticism of certain studies but omitting criticism of the more methodologically flawed or less difinitivevstudies from controversial scholars2600:1007:B067:42EF:7578:6E7F:59D3:B5E5 (talk) 22:24, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Can you list some source material that shares your expert opinion that we can use to update the material? 174.68.24.187 (talk) 15:41, 23 November 2023 (UTC)