Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Neferirkare Kakai/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Sarastro1 via FACBot (talk) 13:19, 24 February 2018.

Neferirkare Kakai

 * Nominator(s): Iry-Hor (talk) 07:49, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

This article is about Neferirkare Kakai, an Egyptian pharaoh of the Fifth Dynasty of Egypt in the 25th century BC. Neferirkare's reign lasted around a decade and he left his pyramid unfinished. Neferirkare is unusual as one of the very few pharaohs explicitely depicted as a benevolent ruler by his contemporaries. Read the article to see what he did to save his courtier from facing immediate death and how he reacted when his vizier had a stroke! This tabloid material is provided to you with a 4500 years delay.Iry-Hor (talk) 07:49, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Image review
 * Captions that are complete sentences should end in periods
 * Done.Iry-Hor (talk) 06:55, 29 January 2018 (UTC)


 * File:Borchardt_Sahure_17.jpg needs a US PD tag. Same with File:Borchardt_Sahure_32.jpg, File:Borchardt_Sahure_34.jpg, File:Borchardt_Sahure_33.jpg, File:Borchardt_Sahure_47.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:10, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Done.Iry-Hor (talk) 06:55, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Comments from FunkMonk (support)

 * I'll review this soon, first thing I noticed is that some of the image captions don't really explain what is shown. For example the images of Neferefre and Ptahshepses, the images are here to represent these individuals, but it would be nice to present the objects in the same way as the other captions do. FunkMonk (talk) 13:39, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. Iry-Hor (talk) 06:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I wonder if the king list image might fit better in the otherwise empty sources section, where it is also mentioned? Now it is kind of cluttered with the ritual vase.
 * Done You are right, done! Iry-Hor (talk) 06:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "dating to the reign Ramses II" Reign of?
 * Done. Iry-Hor (talk) 06:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * You only identify some writers as egyptologists, would be good to introduce the all.
 * I have added the required description to Ogden Goelet, Mark Lehner and Herbert Ricke, let me know if I have missed more. Iry-Hor (talk) 06:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The first one noticed is Miroslav Verner, who still isn't presented at first mention. FunkMonk (talk) 07:09, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. Iry-Hor (talk) 08:42, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "As of 2018", twice. The source used is from 2008, so though I know what you mean, the wording seems slightly inappropriate. You don't have to be that specific, something like "as of the early 21ist century" would be enough, otherwise you'd have to update the sentence every year henceforward...
 * Done. Iry-Hor (talk) 06:38, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "no pieces of the sarcophagus of the king had survived" Why past tense?
 * Done changed to "have survived". Iry-Hor (talk) 06:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "and sotre-rooms" Store?
 * Done it is a type and should read "store-rooms". Iry-Hor (talk) 06:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * In the intro you write "Ranefer (A/B)", whereas you just say "Ranefer A/B" in the article body
 * Done I removed the parentheses. Iry-Hor (talk) 06:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * You mention an "unexpected early death" in various section, but there is no elaboration on the circumstances, or why it is considered unexpected.
 * Done the death in question is that of Neferefre, which is detailed in his article. Here I have simply explained with "who passed away in his early twenties after two years on the throne".Iry-Hor (talk) 06:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "circa 120 years earlier" Only explicitly stated in intro.
 * Done this is now also in the article body. Iry-Hor (talk) 06:34, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * The changes look good, the last issue is that Palermo stone should be linked at first occurrence, whereas it is now linked at the third.
 * Done Well spotted ! Iry-Hor (talk) 08:42, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Support - everything nicely addressed. FunkMonk (talk) 08:44, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Support Comments from Mr rnddude
Here are my findings: Yes. All of them.
 * Alright, in the Sources and Citations sections you variously use endashes (–) and emdashes (—) to cite multiple pages. For example: "Goelet, Ogden (1999). ... pp. 85–87. ISBN 978-0-203-98283-9." versus "Krejčí, Jaromír; Kytnarová, Katarína Arias; Odler, Martin (2015). ... pp. 28—42." It's a minor issue, but, it's a bit distracting. (You also did this with Neferefre, I just didn't notice it at the time). Otherwise the sources are very nicely presented.
 * Done Wow I had not noticed until now. I used to use endashes and switched to emdashes at some point. Anyway, fixed.Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "This also underscores the dependent position of the king with respect to the Ra" - The Ra? wouldn't it just be with respect to Ra. Ra is referring to Ra (god), yes? You wouldn't, for example, say "the Jesus" or "the Zeus". There's only one as it is. Though, conversely, "the sun god" in the next sentence is fine.
 * Done This is a remnant of an earlier sentence. I remember hesitating between "the sun god Ra" and "Ra". I finally opted for the latter to avoid a repetition, but must have forgotten to remove the "the".Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "... "hall of the "Sed festival"." - Eh, I think it should be "hall of the 'Sed festival'" since there's a quote within the quote. Though I am not 100% sure on proper punctuation here.
 * Done ok why not. Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "Another inscription in Aramaic and dating to the Fifth century BCE reads "Mannukinaan son of Sewa"." - Minor point, but, the second inscription was found on a limestone block. When you read the sentence within the paragraph it may give the impression that it was found on another gravestone.
 * Note sure wasn't the second inscription on a different block than the first ? Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, indeed it was. The first inscription was found on a gravestone, the second on a limestone block in the mortuary temple. I was merely pointing to the difference in what it was found on i.e. gravestone vs limestone block. My concern was that a reader may interpret it to mean that the second inscription was found on a different gravestone, when it wasn't found on a gravestone at all. Mr rnddude (talk) 12:03, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Done I see, I have clarified by specifying that it was on a limestone block.Iry-Hor (talk) 12:07, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "... an University of Prague ..." - This is one of those annoying exceptions. While you normally put "an" in front of words starting with a vowel, you should actually put "a" in front of University. This is because of the way it's sounded out "yew-ni-ver-sity". It's a phonetic j. Here's a link if you'd like to confirm. Try sounding it out as well, that sometimes helps.
 * Done yes! I should have known. Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "... was located on its the north side." - Either the "its" or the "the" needs to go [read: needs Tah go]. Preferably drop the "the".
 * Done what the hell another typo. Apologies, I should have double read more carefully.Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "There, a descending corridor with a gable roof made of limestone beams led into a burial chamber, but no pieces of the sarcophagus of the king have survived." - This is a non sequitur. That is, fact A (the lack of a sarcophagus in the burial chamber) does not [logically] follow from fact B (there being a descending corridor leading to the burial chamber). I think what you wanted was to mention that the gable roof of the burial chamber collapsed and that no evidence of the sarcophagus was found under the rubble. Though I can't be sure.
 * Fixed, the source does not say why no pieces of sarcophagus have been found. Thus I really only wanted to mention two facts: the gable roof and the lack of sarcophagus (which contrasts with most other pyramids of the 5th Dynasty, where at least pieces of the sarcophagus have been found). I have split this into 2 sentences. Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "... has pointed out, that such statues ..." - What's the comma there for?
 * Done I don't know either.Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "... record their biographies onto the walls of their tombs." - This one's entirely optional, but, if you want to avoid repeating "their" twice in the same sentence you can change "their biographies" to autobiographies.
 * Done nice.Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "... at least another ..." - at least one other
 * Done.Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "... by the presence of a small pyramid besides that of Khentkaus ..." - Any clue on this second pyramid's location? or do you mean beside as in next to?
 * Done I meant "next to". Dodson & Hilton don't say much more on this, and I must say that I am a bit curious. Could they have gotten a cult pyramid wrong?Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I actually meant for you to drop the "s" from besides as besides means "aside from", whereas beside means "next to". It's fine either way though. My first thought was the cult pyramid as well, it wouldn't surprise me if it was mis-identification. Mr rnddude (talk) 12:10, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "... column-19th row, unfortunately ..." - The comma should be a semi-colon.
 * Done.Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "The Byzantine scholar George Syncellus reports that Africanus relates that the Aegyptiaca mentioned the succession..." - So a guy, heard from some other guy, who once read in a book, written by yet another guy ...? Sorry I couldn't resist.
 * Aha! yes it is this weird. But I like how it traces the history of passing down some knowledge from the Ancient Greeks to us, through Roman and Byzantine scholars.Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree it is quite cool. Mr rnddude (talk) 12:03, 30 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "The eldest son of Sahure with his consort Meretnebty known as Ranefer A before his accession to the throne, he succeeded his father the day following his death and reigned for eight to eleven years, sometime in the early to mid 25th century BCE." - The first comma should be a period, and the following word capitalized. A concrete example of a run-on sentence.
 * Done.Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm happy with the article. Only a few minor nitpicks to deal with. Mr rnddude (talk) 08:58, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for both of your reviews on this!Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem . Thanks for going through the nitpicks, I'm happy to support. Mr rnddude (talk) 12:03, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Sources review

 * Whast does "pl" (in refs 1, 104 and 158) signify? If it's "plate", you spell this out in ref 47, and should do so elsewhere to be be consistent.
 * Done Yes it means plate. I have corrected throughout. Iry-Hor (talk) 09:16, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * There several instances where "p." should be "pp.": 36, 108, 127, 128, 135, 142, 156 and possibly others
 * Done corrected, I have checked all references and changed a number of them as required. Iry-Hor (talk) 09:16, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * For most page ranges you are using mdashes – these should be changed to ndashes
 * Done ARRR! I have changed all recently to mdashes, now reverted.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:16, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * In the sources there appears to be inconsistency over the inclusion of publisher locations. I haven't checked throughout, but Altenmuller 2001, Baker and Clayton are all examples and there are probably more. Please check through.
 * Done all references checked and corrected accordingly.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:16, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Other than in these minor matters, sources are in good order and appear to be of the appropriate quality and reliability. Brianboulton (talk) 19:12, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * All done! Thanks for your input.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:16, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * All well now. Brianboulton (talk) 10:37, 31 January 2018 (UTC)


 * So this is now 2 Supports and completed source and image reviews. could you possibly indicate whether you support or oppose the nomination ? Iry-Hor (talk) 15:02, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * When I'm only concerned with checking sources, I don't register either supports or opposes. Be patient and I'm sure further supports will come. Brianboulton (talk) 15:14, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Support from Tim riley
Just a few small drafting points:
 * Lead
 * To avoid the (theoretical) ambiguity about whose death "his death" was, I might recast this on the lines of "known as Ranefer A before he came to the throne. He acceded the day after his father's death..."
 * Done.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * "and the ephemeral rule of the poorly known Shepseskare" – "ephemeral" seems a bit strong. "Brief" might be safer.
 * Done.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * "after a mishap or a stroke" – careful with "stroke". Readers may think you mean a cerebrovascular accident. I think you could safely end the sentence with "mishap".
 * Done.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Historical sources
 * "is in good agreement " – I'd remove "good": "is in agreement" would be more usual English phrasing.
 * Done.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Parents and siblings
 * "foretells Khufu" – I don't think you can foretell someone something. I'd make this "prophesies to Khufu".
 * Done.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * "who passed away in his early twenties" – we do not use genteel euphemisms: he didn't pass away, pass over, or pass out: he died.
 * Done.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Consort and children
 * "heightened status" – heightened doesn't feel quite right. Perhaps "enhanced"
 * Done enhanced is definitely better.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * "likely younger" – if, as appears, the article is in BrE, I'd avoid this AmE phrasing, and go instead for "probably younger".
 * Done so is "likely" only AmE ? I am really curious about this, it is true that I heard it far more when in the US than in the UK but I had no idea it was really an American wording.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * When "likely" is used as an adjective rather than, as here, an adverb it is as normal in BrE as in AmE. It's only in the particular adverbial construction "xxx, likely yyy" that it is AmE where BrE would have "xxx, probably yyy". There's nothing logical about this: it's just a matter of usage. In the first paragraph of the lead you have "He was himself very likely succeeded", and for no reason that I can find, the addition of "very" makes this perfectly normal BrE whereas "He was himself likely succeeded" wouldn't be. Nobody ever accused English of being a logical language.   Tim riley  talk    10:17, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Duration
 * "but this now considered an overestimation with regards to the archaeological evidences" – this goes off the rails grammatically (no main verb) and is in any case a bit woolly. Perhaps something like "but the archaeological evidence now suggests that this is an overestimate."
 * Done a remnant from the previous version.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * "further vindicated" – a bit combative in tone: I wonder if "substantiated" or "corroborated" might be better.
 * Done ah I really like more diverse vocabulary. Thank you, I will keep these two in mind for future articles as well! Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * "20-years long reign" – I'd make this "20-year-long reign"
 * Done.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Administration
 * "had been excavated" – not sure why the pluperfect; I think the plain past tense, "was excavated", is wanted here.
 * Done.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * "wide entrance columned porticoes and, family" – I wasn't quite sure of the exact meaning here. Are they wide entrance porticoes with columns? And the comma between "and" and "family" seems superfluous.
 * Done changed in a recent review. Changed back. They are indeed entrance porticoes with columns.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * "onto the walls" – I'd make this just "on the walls"
 * Done again changed in a recent review. Changed back.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Modification of the royal titulary
 * "Indeed, he was the earliest" – this is the fourth "indeed", and one begins to notice it. I'd blitz at least a couple of them: the prose will read clearly enough without them.
 * Done. Indeed, I can now see that there are too many of them in this article.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Trade and military activities
 * "Smith has pointed out" – I'd be cautious about "pointed out", which rather suggests an endorsement of what he is saying. I recommend something more neutral, such as "commented".
 * Done.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Personality
 * "You may well find some stickler for the Manual of Style objecting to your decorative quotation marks, which are, for some unfathomable reason, not supposed to be used in the main text. They look fine to me, and I'd leave them there and hope for the best if I were you, but don't be surprised if someone gets shirty.
 * Ok I will keep them for the time being but should a storm arise, I will remove them faster than the time it takes to say crunchy carrots. (I heard this idiomatic expression recently, but it was from a farmer in a farm context, so I am not sure I can use it everywhere).Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Second paragraph: I'm not sure of your rationale for capitalising job titles: "king" doesn't get a capital but "Vizier" does. Seems a bit odd. I didn't spot this inconsistency elsewhere in the article, but it might worth your while checking.
 * Done this is a mistake dating back to the earlier version of the article. Corrected!Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

That's all from me. The above quibbling is too minor to prevent my adding my support. Excellent stuff. –  Tim riley  talk    18:35, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you once more for your precious review.Iry-Hor (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Closing comment: There are a few duplinks, some of which may well be justified. I'd be grateful if someone could check these after promotion. This tool will highlight any duplication. Sarastro (talk) 13:19, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Sarastro (talk) 13:19, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.