User talk:Captmondo/Archives/2007/November

Fayum mummy portraits
Have you finished on this? I just had a big edit conflict. Johnbod 13:33, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Ditto. Have reverted my last set of edits though. You go ahead and I'll catch up tonight if it still needs another pass. Cheers! Captmondo 13:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Johnbod 01:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help in correcting, amongst other things, my sloppy typing, the general structure of the article and what not. athinaios 17:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar! It's my first... athinaios 17:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

In Remembrance...
--nat Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?! 23:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

KV62
Thanks for notifying me about this discussion. I think it's better if it stays at KV62 with all the others being redirects. (In huwiki where this article is up for peer review right now, it's called Királyok völgye 62 which means Valley of the Kings 62, too bad this version isn't widespread enough in English, since this would be the nicest IMHO :) – Alensha   talk  18:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I've posted an oppose on the proposed move and gave very clear reasons why it should remain KV62. Regards, Leoboudv 07:03, 16 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for voting oppose, if the move had gone ahead I was going to rename all of the KV/QV/TT tomb articles! Markh 08:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm happy to see the discussion closed, it didn't look like there was going to be a clear consensus coming out of it. Naming disputes can cause a lot of very heated debate, so I'm glad it's closed. I'm also happy it's not called "Tut's tomb" as Zahi Hawass has it on his official homepage. Although I'm not really happy with KV62, I wouldn't want to move it unless the idea had broad support. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 02:07, 17 November 2007 (UTC)


 * This discussion has now moved to Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Ancient Egyptian). Can you add anything to the discussion? Markh (talk) 19:42, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I voted. This is clearly a Tutankhamun day for me, yesterday I was improving his article in huwiki until late at night, and when I went to sleep I dreamed about Tut :) (and today is the anniversary of Carter's opening the first door :) I've seen your discussion with Markh on his talk page about word usage, added my opinion about that too. – Alensha   talk  14:07, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Keith, I did a post yesterday on the KV62 article at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Ancient Egyptian). Hope you managed top catch it. It concerns naming inconsistencies within the people buried in the Valley of the Kings especially Yuya and the problems of using WP:NC for their tombs. Regards, Leoboudv (talk) 21:29, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Menes
I investigated this some months ago when a similar question arose. Shaw is an exellent scholar whose imput I usually value, but he has a tendancy to accept newer theories as fact which have not necesarraly yet convinced the entire egyptological establishment. He might be right, but my understanding is that most scholars are convinced that there was a first dynasty king with the name Menes, but he was almost certainly either Narmer or Hor Aha under a different name. If Shaw argues for a wholly mythic approach, it should probably be mentioned, but I don't think that most scholars are as convinced, at least not yet. Thanatosimii (talk) 18:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)