Talk:Qatna

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Qatna. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20041012211424/http://www.uni-tuebingen.de:80/ufg/lehrveranstaltungen/caa_ws0001/qatna.html to http://www.uni-tuebingen.de/ufg/lehrveranstaltungen/caa_ws0001/qatna.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20040405083146/http://www.uni-tuebingen.de:80/uni/qvo/highlights/h23-syrien.html to http://www.uni-tuebingen.de/uni/qvo/highlights/h23-syrien.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080509135939/http://kennedy.byu.edu/events/archive.php to http://kennedy.byu.edu/events/archive.php#343

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:08, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Royal Tomb
The intact Royal Tomb of Qatna (the Royal Hypogeum) was a major recent archaeological discovery. So I'm disappointed that the article didn't even have a separate section for this, or didn't highlight it in any way. Y-barton (talk) 15:38, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

That was a while ago. A ref for it is even in Adad-Nirari of Qatna. But yes should probably get more ink in the article.Ploversegg (talk) 18:01, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * And now, as it turns out, there were two intact tomb surprises. The second one, the double-chambered Tomb VII was found in 2009, and it was also full of remarkable objects. I'll put this into the article soon. Y-barton (talk) 02:36, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

No need for disappointment. The tomb does not warrant a whole section. If there is enough material, then it should be given its own short article which I did here: Royal Hypogeum of Qatna. This is a featured article, so you need to first discuss changes on the talk page. Some sources added are not academic and some sentences do not have a citation and thats not good for a featured article. You also almost eliminated the lead! I have reverted most of your edits for now, awaiting a discussion here (remember, a featured article is the result of a consensus and this article was heavily discussed during its nomination process, including the organization of its sections)--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 18:04, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Using Archaeological periods
We use archaeological periods when we have nothing else to go by. With the Kingdom of Qatna, we have a clear polity where the sub-headings: zenith - decline ....etc dont make much sense if the main section is simply: Middle Bronze. The readers are not archaeologists and naming the kingdom of Qatna by its corresponding archaeological period will confuse them. Also, it is important to note that Amut-Pi-Il I is not mentioned in connection with Qatna, and that the next mention after the story of Sinuhe is from Mari during the reign of Ishi Addu. Attar-Aram syria (talk) 13:39, 30 June 2023 (UTC)