User talk:Khruner/Archive 7

Ramesses III
I'm still not happy with the title as the source was not aimed at his genetics but at his relationship with the other mummy. The addition about where the haplogroup is found isn't from the source, it's from another source so that's OR. I don't for a moment believe the IP's claims, we've seen too many socks and others trying to add this. But I've reverted twice. Perhaps I need to go to NORN. Doug Weller talk 10:14, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not happy either. Insist on changing the section title is sterile Afrocentrism in its worst meaning, and verges the NNPOV policy. The second addition looks a lot like synthesis and should be discouraged. And how about Moses? Khruner (talk) 10:28, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * And I presume 'Afrocentrism' is what you say it is... How about, how about... Moses? If Moses' haplogroup was published in the BMJ, would you try to keep it out or bury it somewhere, or argue that clearly stating what Moses' haplogroup would be NNPOV? 83.84.100.133 (talk) 21:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It is completely immaterial what the aim of the study was. The fact is that in the process of this study, they performed a genetic test on Ramses III, and found that his haplogroup is E1b1a. Now if it had been R1b, we wouldn't be talking about this, and there would not be constant revisions to the article. Zahi Hawass would still call this "a wonderful result", and it would be frontpage news. The only reason this is even an issue, and why 'the both of you' (I presume) are 'unhappy', is because you don't want to think about the implication what is otherwise cold, hard, science. And you are hiding your emotional reaction behind bureaucratic rules. And the BMJ is a peer reviewed publication, thanks for wasting my time finding that out. You are Luddites, standing in the way of progress. 83.84.100.133 (talk) 21:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Now we can both add "Luddite" to our cv, alongside atheist, evolutionist, eurocentrist, freemason, conspirator, and flat-earth negationist. Khruner (talk) 16:22, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Lol - if the journal article had intended to discuss his genetics, it would have. We shouldn't cherrypick from the data. And I thought the IP wasn't interested in the implications (which aren't mentioned in the journal other than the relationship with the mummy). Doug Weller  talk 16:52, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Nebka
Hello Khruner, I have recently updated the article on Nebka and proposed it at GA candidate. Would you accept to review it ? A GAN review is quick and only checks a few things. This would enable quick promotion of the article. Iry-Hor (talk) 12:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Hey there, ok I'll take on him (if I get how to do that). Khruner (talk) 16:31, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Easy, just click here, you can use a template but you don't have to. GAN review is essentially supposed to check that the material is cited and the prose is not too bad.Iry-Hor (talk) 18:18, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Done, I guess. Khruner (talk) 20:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Photos of the Sudan
Hello Khruner, I was contacted recently by amateur photograph Matthias Gehricke and after discussion he agreed to upload some of his photos to wikicommons: the nice news is that he has photographed a lot of things from Sudan, which you rarely see. If there are photos you would like to see/use on wikipedia from his website let me know which and I will ask him to upload them.Iry-Hor (talk) 08:51, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello, beautiful pictures indeed. I'd like to have on Commons the stela of Siaspiqa, here, the statue of queen Amanimalil here (never heard of her), as well as the famous group of kings of Kush here, which is valuable for two reasons: it's finally a decent picture of them, and they are correctly named in other accompanying pictures. Khruner (talk) 16:14, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Gret thanks for your input. I will also ask for a few more pictures, including the statue of Atlanersa here, better than a scarab to illustrate the article!Iry-Hor (talk) 10:22, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Matthias Gehricke has started to upload some of his pics, see here. He did a great job with the metadata which is more precise than usual on such pics. Meanwhile I dug up a number of good refs on Kushite kings and queens so I will do a bit of edit works on this now.Iry-Hor (talk) 16:07, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Their categories seem to need a fix, though. Anyway you did a great job with Siaspiqa; yesterday I found him on Fontes Historiae Nubiorum (a lucky accident, I only had the two pages where he is mentioned, scanned from the original a long ago, when I created the article for Amaniastabarqa) only to see that you preceded me. Khruner (talk) 16:35, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah, which categories should I recommend him ? because he still has a few to upload. About the queen Amanimalel (I think ?) I need to gather more stuff on her. If you ever come accross something, let me know!Iry-Hor (talk) 17:34, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * She was possibly a queen of Senkamanisken, only known by that statue. There are a few lines about her on Dunham & Macadam 1949, p. 142. About the categories, when I upload some archaeological artefact, I usually put: where it came from; where it is now (usually a museum); the artefact type (statue, stele...); a datation in centuries/dynasty; if it depicts a person, the occupation of the owner (nomarch, priest...); eventually, what it is made of (sandstone, granite...); again eventually, extra categories. In several cases, one can found two of these features merged into one category, such as "reliefs of the 12th Dynasty" or "ancient Egyptian reliefs in the Cairo Egyptian Museum". Khruner (talk) 18:20, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Pedubast and Pemu
In Kahn's 2006 article on the invasions of Egypt by the Assyrians, it is related that Egyptians chronicles the "Pedubast cycles" bear traces of a defeat of Essarhaddon in March 673BC at the hands of a certain Pemu ruler of Heliopolis, who defended the Wady Tumilat against the Assyrians for a "pharaoh Pedubast". Beyond the surprise of reading that the Assyrian emperor in all his might was vainquished by a puny Pemu, there is the big question of who was this Pemu serving ? Who is this Pedubast ? In 673 BC, Egypt was nominally under Taharqa, who clearly ruled over plenty of vassals, of which Pedubast must be one in spite of being called Pharaoh. But on wikipedia, there is NO Pedubast that can fit the bill. Do you have any idea who this is??Iry-Hor (talk) 17:51, 19 October 2019 (UTC)


 * I believe that the political situation in Lower Egypt between the late 22nd Dynasty and the rise of Psamtik I is likely the most chaotic of the whole ancient Egyptian history. The Cycle of Petubastis does not help at all in understanding that situation; on the contrary, it introduced several issues. According to Kitchen, the Cycle of Petubastis are a group of demotic stories filled with characters and names which are reminiscent of historical figures of this period, along with other matters of clearly later dates (Saite, Persian etc.). Their creation date is uncertain, but the manuscripts are datable to the Graeco-Roman period. While some issues seems to fit relatively well in the political situation of the very end of the TIP, others are hopelessly out of place. Pemu, for example, is not identified by Kitchen with any historical known namesake (and there are many of them). Furthermore, at the time Heliopolis wasn't important enough to be the seat of power of any ruler, and was instead subject of the ruler of Athribis, at the time a certain Bakennefi C (one of many namesakes). Something different applies to Petubastis: Essarhaddon's successor Ashurbanipal mentions a Putubisti among the local Delta rulers of his time. Kitchen identifies both the demotic Petubastis and Putubisti with Sehetepib(en)re Pedubast of Tanis. This seems to fit well, except that most scholars today seem to believe that Pedubast of Tanis actually ruled around 730 BCE, between Shoshenq V and Osorkon IV; consequently, Petubastis and/or Putubisti has to be identified with another, still unidentified Delta ruler, or maybe two. The issue dealing with the number and placement of the Pedubasts is an unsettled debate: another paper by Kahn ("A problem of Pedubasts", 2006) suggests that Pedubast I's attestations actually refers to two different rulers. Apparently I can't find other sources, besides Kahn 2006, supporting the historicity of an Assyrian defeat in Egypt in 673 BCE. We should consider that the Cycle of Petubastis also tells of how Inaros I killed a griffon and made a breastplate from its skin, and how his son Padikhons dueled with the queen of the Amazons in the Levant, allied with her, and both conquered India(!). Khruner (talk) 08:33, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for these explanations. I see that the situation at the time was highly complex politically, as can aslo be guessed from the dynamics of the Assyrian invasion and almost immediat withdrawal from Egypt. Regarding the defeat of Essarhaddon, it seems like one must be believed to have taken place to explain the failure of Assyrians to intervene in Egypt in 673 BC, which is an historical fact. Aside from this explanations, other are of course possible (small scale incursion, illness on the part of Essarhaddon who was soon to die etc.). Perhaps we could add something on a disambiguation page on Pedubast if there is one ?Iry-Hor (talk) 10:55, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Indeed we have Pedubastis. However, be careful to follow WP:MOSDAB. Khruner (talk) 11:36, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I added a simple sentence "In addition, various kinglets of the Third Intermediate Period of Egypt bore the name Pedubast." at the end of the DAB.Iry-Hor (talk) 16:13, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I definitely should rewrite Pedubast II's article sooner of later. I had planned to fix it long ago, but found his dating dispute irritating and gave up. Khruner (talk) 19:20, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

New message from Doug Weller
Doug Weller talk 17:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Could you spare a review ?
Hello Khuner ! I am currently proposing Sahure at FAC. However the article has so far received only one review support beyond the source and image checks. If this interests you and if you have some time to spare, could you possibly see if you could review the article for the FAC candidacy? Your review can be as short as a few sentences (or as long as pages!), either raising points you would like to see being addressed, or simply stating that you oppose/support the article with a few explanations. Don't worry if you prefer not to do it!Iry-Hor (talk) 18:38, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Do we have a deadline? I may be able to do that, but only during the weekend.. Khruner (talk) 19:33, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries I think Sahure will show up at FAC for another month or so.Iry-Hor (talk) 08:31, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * the discussion is archived, can I add a review anyway? Khruner (talk) 12:40, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes yes don't worry is not archived yet, it is only the (normal) name of the reivew pages at FAC. If the discussion was really archived and inactive you wouldn't be able to edit it, and it would have a blue background.Iry-Hor (talk) 13:27, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Burney Relief
How one can conclude that "the Queen of the Night" ancient Babylonian surviving artifact is of no relation for those looking into Nephthys, is yet another mystery... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.32.159.13 (talk) 21:01, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Your claim needs to be backed by a reliable source. Original research is not allowed here. Khruner (talk) 21:24, 14 December 2019 (UTC) I'd leave it up to the individual's perspective might be looking into Nephthys at this point; apparently it's quite the artifact.
 * The Burney Relief likely depicts Inanna/Ishtar. One should rather search for sources confirming the Inanna-Nephthys identification, perhaps something may exist. But finding a source relating the artefact itself with Nephthys seems impossible to me. Khruner (talk) 21:46, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

I'd agree that Nephthys doesn't seem included there, for some reason (to me). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.32.159.13 (talk) 21:53, 14 December 2019 (UTC) If you notice one is the "Queen of Heaven", most likely of the exact Biblical reference for, while this iconography led to the "Queen of the Night" title which seems to have led some even to the Biblical Lilith; but no Nephthys. Nephthalim acts prominently in the Bible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.32.157.34 (talk) 13:43, 15 December 2019 (UTC)  Maybe, as far as being related, I found how Ishtar and her sister worked out in that one actually takes the other's signatory icons and this one here actually seems to stack three sets of horns as an apex  headdress, with one orb on top, in that she might be thus be very much so something related? (Four sets of horns.)
 * I don't know, sounds like original research to me. It depends on how much reliable your sources are, I guess. I thought you dropped Nephthys from your equation. Khruner (talk) 18:24, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

That is found at what Ishtar and her sister do, that makes some sense especially in the Burney Relief, apparently. Nephthys is a difficult idea, but the wisdom overtone of the Burney Relief is palatable (ha ha). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.32.110.112 (talk) 18:31, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * There is a bit too much on the fire: could you summarize for me what you would like to demonstrate? Because I got lost among the Burney Relief, the Queen of the Night, the Queen of Heaven, Lilith, and the Nephthalim. Khruner (talk) 18:52, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

I still think my posting into the article, that was deleted by you, was not supported accurately as being totally unrelated etc. Maybe leave it up for a while and see what happens? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.32.110.112 (talk) 18:57, 21 December 2019 (UTC) (It's a strange find with a lot of disbelief created..)
 * I'm afraid that's not how things work here on Wikipedia, this is not a blog or a discussion forum, you really need sources backing your claims. The only other thing you could do - but it is not at all simple - is to publish your hypotheses in a peer reviewed journal... Khruner (talk) 22:49, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Articles stand in differing qualities and perhaps my addition can be left but to see if it might gather some assistance of the usual sort for a borderline case? The cow horn symbol originates way back in Egyptian work. An apex of that sort seems Egyptian. The braids on the breasts seem identical to founding Egyptian designs. Listed in Categories here is Night Goddesses. I'd say the Burney Relief is related enough to this article to be included as I did it already as a bit of a Wikipedia dissemination act. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.107.170.183 (talk) 13:06, 22 December 2019 (UTC)  You'd have to conclude that being familiar with the Burney Relief is additional information?
 * I'd conclude that anything written on Wikipedia which is not supported by reliable sources can very well be the result of original research which does not deserve to stay here. For the last time, please read what reliable sources and original research are, and edit what you want by using the former and avoiding the latter. Khruner (talk) 14:17, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Do you think there might be a proper way to include a Burney Relief reference in the Nephthys Wikipedia article, as maybe one last talk on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.107.170.183 (talk) 14:36, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Nephthys, again? In my opinion, there is no reliable source in the world that supports this equivalence, so no. Khruner (talk) 15:03, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Right, just for here and now in what we're discussing with this article - trying to insert some sort of Burney Relief reference is out of the question as a connection of any sort to Nephthys has no reliable source to cite for what might be related between the two. I think I got it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.107.170.183 (talk) 15:25, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

A complex notion to maybe allow to be included here (ha ha) is even a relation found with/in psychedelic use, as recorded/reported. John Lennon referenced Tim Leary etc. Leary's notions on The Tibetan Book of the Dead, in their (co-authored with Metzner) The Psychedelic Experience, was (in part) disregarded as a manual by Lennon in some interview of his many, at some point (using big names here) for of what it was that Leary thought was going on; [as] to say what's The Egyptian Book of the Dead trying to be about, too (I always tend to wonder if it was The Egyptian Book of the Dead that Leary liked, but it was The Tibetan one; but big name dropping anyway for in this article). In only reading some an excerpt some of The Psychedelic Experience, they was thinking the psychedelic experience was about having a serious adjustment to your consciousness, like death would be too...(and some people of that sort could be looking around this far along). It (The Egyptian one) seems to be derived from the "writings on the walls." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.107.144.115 (talk) 19:12, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

I'll drop it as this isn't a chat, but The Psychedelic Experience is another recording that Leary made around the time he made Turn On, Tune In, Drop out. I think I've listened to the whole of the latter but never knew of the former till this time. Leary to me has an enjoyable delivery for this stuff. In listening to The Psychedelic Experience though, getting not too far yet, he actually tells them any fears they're having is only a product of their minds. I've listened some to Leary interviews and as a whole it's pretty strange as it appears the notion that it's all some sort of a funny game is held right throughout - even at questioning on how that's possible for him to maintain. He does say they were making it up as they went along (naturally) and his worst thoughts shouldn't have to be dwelt on all the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.32.105.56 (talk) 18:50, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
 * you are too off topic now and, as you said, this isn't a chat... Khruner (talk) 08:47, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Babylon is interesting/shows up in the Bible, too. The Bible is considered at least somewhat related for here, correct? In Daniel, the famous writing on the wall episode has to do with being "weighed and found wanting" as seems an Egyptian theory went - with Nephthys actually present for in her status in Egyptian thought? I bring this up as a somewhat related "talk" topic for here, and possibly even as a contribution for improving the Wikipedia article on Nephthys. In Daniel near its end, he needs some food for a stay in one of Babylon lion's den; the participant declined in that he'd never been to Babylon so how would he find the den anyway, in the first place; whereas the angel grabs him by the hair and zips him to the den. I'm telling you, Babylon can be of interest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.32.116.129 (talk) 19:06, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Again, as any perspective builds, but some could even enjoy a sort of a nodding listen to New Minglewood Blues, off the Grateful Dead's Dead Set.

It's Wikipedia after all (you'd imagine some broad perspectives around etc.), but when "it" runs itto the British Isles, too? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.107.167.145 (talk) 19:21, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

(The Tuatha De Danann etc.) Ha ha  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.107.167.145 (talk) 19:56, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Friend, it pains me to remind you again that this is not a chat. Nothing personal, but your messages have not been clear to me for some time now. You are free to edit on Wiki as long as you follow the rules. I'm an assiduous supporter of the use of reliable sources, as well as a strict skeptic towards any fringe hypothesis of which I honestly don't enjoy to chit-chat about: I let authoritative scholars to talk about it. Edit wisely and until next time. Khruner (talk) 20:09, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.107.167.145 (talk) 20:19, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Talk about pressure. Today in looking up "Nephthys" using Bing, in the "Overview" section of a sort of a cut out panel review listings of things/highlights with this "Overview" section's content being displayed automatically for the search result - for the official Wikipedia article on Nephthys - it is using that paragraph as I edited it with the Burney Relief reference as the overview (but when going to the actual article it isn't there). It seems to be under a license, too, in how it gets used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.32.144.170 (talk) 16:16, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Most likely the overview section is outdated somehow, I can't explain why. Khruner (talk) 17:27, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

They would have had to been almost instant as it didn't sit as an article like that for long there and it could be something that just happened, as that was the first I saw it just now earlier today and still thinking it will not last long - but seems a solid act and all, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.32.146.63 (talk) 18:26, 24 January 2020 (UTC) It's well done maybe, all around more some now, as the Tuatha De Danann comes under question, maybe?

How romantic is that? Ha ha — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.47.127.162 (talk) 21:21, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Here we go again
- I really wish we could stop cherry picking of articles on genetics and only use the summary/discussion. And I doubt it's a coincidence that we've got another account adding this stuff. you've also been involved in this issue. Love the good faith shown by this new account. Doug Weller talk 14:03, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * can't we simply WP:BLUELOCK those sensitive articles? Khruner (talk) 16:22, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * No, there's really not enough disruption even for simple semi-protection. ¬¬¬¬ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talk • contribs) 16:33, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * isn't that the same as abusing multiple accounts? Can't we ask for a checkuser help? Khruner (talk) 16:52, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * No, the data would be stale as it's only kept for three months. And I'm not sure if it's socking or people working together offwiki or what. If there is a blocked sock on any of the relevant articles we might be able to find any similarities, but that's the best we could do. I'm not sure if you know that I'm a Checkuser. Doug Weller  talk 17:17, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I wasn't aware of that. And I guess that the single-purpose account policy won't resolve anything. How could be possible that in both the article talks, in all these years, a solution could not be found? Khruner (talk) 17:45, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

You might be interested
In recent edits to Black Egyptian hypothesis. Doug Weller talk 20:12, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I was out for a drink. Yes, another troublemaker with whom, as you have most likely noticed, I already had to quarrel today. He started by deleting sourced stuff on Kerma culture and reverting any explained recovery attempt, only for altering the text in a different way from what he intended initially, while trying to get me wrong on my talk. I let it go because he seemed more irritating than disruptive, but the edits you pointed out seem to indicate otherwise indeed. Khruner (talk) 23:07, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Djoser
, Hello and happy holidays! As you possibly know, unfortunately I have a very limited interest (and consequently, knowledge) on anything in Egyptian history which predates the First Intermediate Period. In spite of this, now I find myself in need of knowing more about Djoser (more specifically, of his iconography and of the influence it had on later - even much later - Egyptian art). I would be grateful if you could recommend me some readings on the topic. Khruner (talk) 09:50, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * if you read French, I think that might be goodː Michel Baud Djéser et la IIIe dynastie, 2002 ISBN 978-2857047797 (I never looked at itǃ) -- Udimu (talk) 11:20, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'll give it a try, I never learned French but being a Romance language, maybe I can get a grasp of it anyway. Khruner (talk) 17:49, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * As I read French, I can translate selected passages for you to English if you want. Otherwise, I don't know what source to propose. I would start from standard books such as Oxford's Ancient Egypt Encyclopedia which must include at least some discussion on Djoser's legacy. You could also look up on JSTOR as nearly all of their articles are accessible for free once you are registered.Iry-Hor (talk) 08:09, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know of books dedicated to Djoser in English (or Italian), and a lot of the analysis of his reign concentrates on his pyramid complex. Early Dynastic Egypt (1999) by Toby Wilkinson includes the Third Dynasty as part of the Early Dynastic Period, and it describes the evolution of Egypt's royal administration and economy during those three dynasties. Because the evidence is scant, the book doesn't say a whole lot about any individual king's reign, but it gives a picture of the era and how the developments of Djoser's time fit in with it. There don't seem to be any really detailed histories of the Old Kingdom, but there are some books about Old Kingdom art, such as When the Pyramids Were Built by Dorothea Arnold and Egyptian Art in the Age of the Pyramids from the Metropolitan Museum of Art.


 * Beyond that, most of the information you'll find about Djoser outside scholarly journals is about the pyramid. The authoritative books in English about the pyramids are The Complete Pyramids (1997) by Mark Lehner, The Pyramids (2002) by Miroslav Verner, and The Pyramids of Egypt (most recent edition 1993) by I. E. S. Edwards. Jean-Philippe Lauer was the greatest authority on the Step Pyramid during his lifetime, and although he wrote mostly in French, his book Saqqara: The Royal Cemetery of Memphis (1976) was published in English. I don't know if any of that helps you, but I'm listing it just in case. A. Parrot (talk) 18:07, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Many thanks to everyone for the suggestions! I should get something good out of them. Khruner (talk) 08:47, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Resolved
Hi, a late follow-up message you may be interested in: The issue you had contacted me about earlier has now been resolved. Best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:15, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * thanks a lot! Khruner (talk) 21:54, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Land of Punt
What do you think of the recent changes? I'm not reverting as I want to stay independent with regard to the editor. Doug Weller talk 07:46, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm unsure about that. The complete removal of other suggested locations should be handled with care. I'd have left the part about Arabia, and I remember having rigorously skimmed the sources about Sri Lanka, what little was left was IMO reliable. On the other hand I'm aware that, in the name of mainstream scholarly, one can almost freely remove most of the dissenting-to-fringe hypotheses. Khruner (talk) 08:30, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
 * You know me, I don't add fringe, and I added Dimitri Meeks ans well as Ian Shaw's Cambridge University Press book.. This seems to be pov editor. See and - note the focus on the Horn of Africa. Whether some of what he removed was fringe, he clearly removed well-sourced material. I guess I could get involved, revert and if he carries on go back to ANI.  Doug Weller  talk 11:06, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree, in the end he seems to be a bit of a troublemaker. And the stuff he removed cannot be considered fringe in the sense that we understand it. Khruner (talk) 11:47, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
 * IP did us a favour tonight but now they got reverted. I have a feeling we are on the verge of an edit war there. I don't feel like getting in the way, there could be other lawyers among them, must be cautious! Khruner (talk) 12:16, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I think they'll have a problem. The editor self-reverted after I explained the situation. And see []. Doug Weller  talk 14:45, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Now see WP:RSN as he's reverted again. Doug Weller  talk 19:58, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I saw you from over at the Tuatha De Danann Wikipedia article, you might enjoy that Fleetwood Mac live version of Rhiannon from the Midnight Special '76. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.32.113.229 (talk) 18:05, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've just heard it on YT. Although it doesn't fit in my musical tastes, I have to say it sounds good. Pleasant guitar riff. Khruner (talk) 12:16, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Romanticism can really build quickly in there, it seems. Maybe too much of a contrast for some around here etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.107.153.192 (talk) 14:39, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Please see
WP:ANI Doug Weller  talk 10:12, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Just back from work, but it seems to have ended relatively well. BTW I have an issue on false door where, as usual, I think I'm in the right, but I could be wrong. What do you think? Khruner (talk) 17:30, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

YGM
please have a look https://tl.net/forum/starcraft-2/561092-understandment-of-maximum-effort you will probably enjoy a lot — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwaltr (talk • contribs) 22:28, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Tom Meade draft
Following up on our previous correspondence, I have begun a draft article about car designer Tom Meade at Draft:Tom_Meade. I invite you to contribute if you are interested. Prova MO  (talk)  03:41, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello, yes I'm still interested but a week ago I had to drop most of my wiki work because of my sudden call back to work after three weeks of quarantine, thus I could work on Tom Meade rather erratically. Khruner (talk) 06:49, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I had something more or less ready to be put into the article. Khruner (talk) 09:34, 19 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Looks awesome, thanks! I'm adding some more to the article today. Prova MO   (talk)  20:02, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Why?
Why you deleted my contribution? What is The explication? Please, speak with me! Fan Vic Plut (talk) 15:58, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * for the same reason that you're now again blocked. You were already blocked for persistent addition of unsourced or unreliably sourced content. Then you got blocked twice for abusing multiple accounts attempting to circumvent the block, which is prohibited here. If Victor Plutasu were an authoritative scholar in Egyptology then he would publish his findings on peer-reviewed journals or conference proceedings, not on self-published works, including a mere weblog. Khruner (talk) 16:42, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Don't tell me what to do am the 1 who put the retirement in the beginning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew9393787 (talk • contribs) 11:01, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Time to learn how to use both WP:RS and Signatures then. Khruner (talk) 11:17, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Ta Seti Page
I believe you deleted my contribution to the Ta Seti page. I have added the requested documentation. Just wanted to let you know! Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.75.74.184 (talk) 01:54, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I saw your message, however, how can two contradicting positions be equally valid? One is either right or wrong, and I have shown sources which you have accepted as valid, therefore, the page must be edited and the edit must remain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.75.74.184 (talk) 04:16, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, the article is clearly about the nomos. And even if the same name was sometimes applied to the country beyond its southern border (Nubia) as stated in the lead, for me it is clear that the Ta-Seti people mentioned in the article are specifically those who lived in the nomos and not in Nubia, about which one should rather read the more suitable articles Nubia or Nubians. I restored the edit but also added a "distinguish" hatnote. Khruner (talk) 07:28, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

 * Hello! I'm sorry I didn't say anything, I'm actually getting used to the edit stuff in Wikipedia. Anyhow, an inscription from the temple of Efdu says Mȝfdt-sȝt-Gb "Mafdet, daughter of Geb". She's not an Eye of Ra Goddess, she never was stated as such, and never represented with the headdress. This can be found in LGG volume 3, by Christian Leitz.

Ana Sofia Duarte (talk) 21:24, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Descendants
Coptic is a descendant of the Greek alphabet. Heiratic is the other descendant of Hieroglyphics along with Proto-Sinaitic. Heiratic's descendant is Demotic, who's descendant is Meroitic. Thank you for responding to me.

Wizardito-OL (talk) 22:30, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Nubia
Hello, I made edits to the 'Nubia' page with what I believe to be reliable sources, which you immediately undid. I added additional source to support my edits. Please let me know your concerns before editing my changes again and I will discuss and address your concerns to the best of my abilities. Thank you for your consideration. Charles Bélanger Nzakimuena (talk) 21:14, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Ahmose-Nefertari
Hello, I made edits to the 'Ahmose-Nefertari' page with what I believe to be reliable sources, which you immediately undid. I added additional source to support my edits. Please let me know your concerns before editing my changes again and I will discuss and address your concerns to the best of my abilities. Thank you for your consideration. Charles Bélanger Nzakimuena (talk) 21:15, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * hello, please let's bring that to Talk:Ahmose-Nefertari. Khruner (talk) 21:27, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Very well Charles Bélanger Nzakimuena (talk) 22:05, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Egyptian Hieroglyphs
About me removing content, Meroitic is from Demotic, which is from Hieratic, which is from Hieroglyphs. Coptic is from Greek, from Phoenician, from Proto-Sinaitic, from Hieroglyphs.

Wizardito-OL (talk) 16:30, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * as long as you provide reliable sources backing your claims, for me it is OK even if it is from Adunaic or R'lyehian. I don't really care that much. Cheers, Khruner (talk) 17:04, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Ahmose-Nefertari again
Hi there. I seem to recall that you added Gitton originally. Do I remember correctly? If yes, may I assume that you read French? Wdford (talk) 13:16, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I was away, and soon I'll be away again. I added Gitton 1981, since there was already an older work of him before. I don't read French but being a romance language it's considerably easier to me to interpret (of course Google translate simplifies things even more). Do you still need that? If not, I hope everything went well with that issue. Khruner (talk) 17:10, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * All good for now. A new editor is also helping, but all hands are welcome. :) Wdford (talk) 19:40, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Maybe it was because of the translation of this sentence:


 * “Depuis toujours, on a été frappé par la couleur noire que certains documents utilisent pour rendre le visage et les autres parties visibles du corps de la reine. Nous reviendrons plus loin sur l'origine probable de cette coutume. Nous savons déjà qu'elle est inconnue de son vivant (dans la tombe de Tétiky, elle a les chairs claires comme les autres personnages) et qu'elle ne sera jamais systématique. Ainsi sur trois tombes de Deir el Médineh et Drah Abou el Neggah datant de Ramses II.”
 * Let's find out if I was right from the start or not. Dear sorry for bothering you, could you tell us who or what does the bold qu'elle refer to? Khruner (talk) 21:10, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The "qu'elle" refers to the custom of representing the queen with a black skin. The author says this custom is not known from sources contemporary with her lifetime, i.e. no representation of the queen dating to her lifetime depicts her as black skinned. He also says that the custom never became systematical and gives examples from her lifetime and later times, where she is not depicted as black skinned.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Just as I had imagined. Qu'elle does not refer to the queen herself but to the custom, both of which are feminine in French (as in Italian), hence the incorrect "she" instead of "it" in automated English translations. Thanks, French seems to be somewhat more understandable even to an Italian who does not know it. Not sure if this is still of any help, , since I have not followed all the controversy surrounding that article since late December, but I just wanted to be sure of what I understood the first time I've read (and wrote down) that. In the sentence, Gitton never claimed that depictions of A.N. are unknown in her lifetime (as incorrectly understandable from the clumsy Google translation), but rather that A.N. is always depicted as "non-black" during her lifetime. Khruner (talk) 18:41, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Excellent news. Please could you tweak the article wording accordingly? Thanks Wdford (talk) 20:57, 6 February 2021 (UTC)