Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sheshi/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 Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 12:19, 5 December 2015.

Sheshi

 * Nominator(s): &#32;Iry-Hor (talk) 20:49, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

This article is about Maaibre Sheshi, an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh during the Second Intermediate Period. Sheshi is the best attested king of this time period in terms of the number of artefacts attributed to him and yet Egyptologists cannot agree on any single thing regarding him beyond his name. Hence the dynasty, chronological position, duration of reign and extent of rule of Sheshi are highly uncertain and the object of a strong ongoing debate in Egyptology. These issues are closely intertwined with the arrival of the Hyksos in Egypt and thus of paramount importance in understanding the sequence of events associated with the fall of the Middle Kingdom c. 1700 BCE. &#32;Iry-Hor (talk) 20:49, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Comments from P. S. Burton

 * There appears to be an error in the page numbers for the reference "von Beckerath 1999, pp. 180–109." should it perhaps be "108–109" or "180–190"?
 * Done it is 108-109, thanks for spotting this!&#32;Iry-Hor (talk) 07:21, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

P. S. Burton (talk)  23:35, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
 * What does "king f." mean in the reference "von Beckerath 1999, pp. 116–117, king f..", is this an error?
 * Actually, there is no error: von Beckerath gives letters to the kings for whom he is not sure of the chronological position. Hence Sheshi is given as "king f." in von Beckerath's XV/XVI dynasty.&#32;Iry-Hor (talk) 07:21, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Support – I reviewed the article for GAN, and found it thoroughly impressive. The prose is excellent, the balance admirable and, as far as a layman like me can tell, the sourcing is comprehensive. The article seems to me to meet all the FA criteria and I am very pleased to add my support for its promotion.  Tim riley  talk    17:59, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks!!&#32;Iry-Hor (talk) 20:18, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Image review
 * File:Sheshi_scarabs_locations.png: what is the source of the data presented in this image? Nikkimaria (talk) 21:06, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I did the image myself from the GPS coordinates of the archeological sites where seals of Sheshi have been found. The list of these sites is found in Ryholt's 1997 book "The political situation in Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period". Only those sites for which I could find the GPS coordinate have been added to the map.&#32;Iry-Hor (talk) 13:40, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Support. Most of the sources are as reliable as they get. A few are not quite so solid but used carefully (Rohl is on the fringes of respectability but is cited here as one end of a range of positions, less contentious than many of his others; old sources are used for uncontentious description of artifacts; and so forth). I spot-checked several citations and found and corrected only one error. I also did some minor copyediting; my only really significant change was to reduce some repetitiveness created by the scholarly back-and-forth. A. Parrot (talk) 02:46, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the updates!&#32;Iry-Hor (talk) 07:32, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Comments reading through now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:04, 26 November 2015 (UTC)


 *  Over 80 per cent of the seals attributed to Maaibre Sheshi are of unknown provenance, - maybe adding something in note 6 about why their provenance is presumed unknown...?
 * I am not sure to understand what you mean: seals of unknown provenance are of unknown origin, having typically been digged up illegally and sold on the antiquity market, either directly to museum as in the 19th century, or to private dealers who then donated them. Thus nobody knowns the origin of these seals because the original excavators are (possibly long dead) illegal diggers. I just added a sentence explaining this, let me know if this what indeed what you meant.&#32;Iry-Hor (talk) 09:25, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes this is exactly what I mean, as I suspect some not familiar with Ancient egypt might not understand this. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:56, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

support - interesting topic and good at highlighting uncertainty while remaining clear and accessible. I'll take the word of others on comprehensiveness. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:59, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks!&#32;Iry-Hor (talk) 14:10, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

comment reading through, leaning support. Ceoil (talk) 23:03, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Support - on prose and sources; happy that someone as versed as A. Parrot is satisfied on comprehensiveness, weight, etc Ceoil (talk) 01:58, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, I can't claim to be a real expert on the Second Intermediate Period and I hadn't heard of this particular king until recently, but I don't see how there could be much more to say about a king this obscure. By including the various hypotheses about his background, the article gives a good idea of the context, which I do generally know—how murky this period was and who the major players were. The possible Nubian alliance, for example, fits in with increasing evidence that Nubia was a major power in the region at the time. A. Parrot (talk) 09:08, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank, for your support. I have found that most articles dealing with the Second Intermediate Period are far from reflecting the totally (or even majority) of scholars opinions about the events of the period, due to the complete lack of consensus on anything beyond mere names in many cases. Thus the date of the Hyksos' arrival, their manner of arrival, if there were vassals etc. are all debated and it is thus difficult to construct encyclopedic articles without either presenting only one point of view or falling in a litany of "this person says this, this one says that". I have tried to strike the right balance for Sheshi, who is, after all, the best attested king of the period (in terms of the number of artefacts).&#32;Iry-Hor (talk) 16:52, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Have encountered similar issues on other articles, and think a good balance is struck here. Ceoil (talk) 23:54, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Coord note -- I'm going to promote but could you pls review the duplinks in the article and see if all are really necessary. Ping me of you need a link to the duplink checker... Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:17, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 12:19, 5 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, could you please give a link to a duplink checker? Thanks in advance!&#32;Iry-Hor (talk) 18:03, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Here it is. Once you install, the link to invoke it appears under the Tools section to the left of the article page you're viewing. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:29, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, done!&#32;Iry-Hor (talk) 07:39, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.