A fact from 317a and 317b mummies appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 6 June 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that Tutankhamun's infant daughters are unnamed, being referred to only as "the Osiris" on their coffins?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egyptological subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient EgyptTemplate:WikiProject Ancient EgyptAncient Egypt articles
We should have an article on every pyramid and every nome in Ancient Egypt. I'm sure the rest of us can think of other articles we should have.
Cleanup.
To start with, most of the general history articles badly need attention. And I'm told that at least some of the dynasty articles need work. Any other candidates?
Standardize the Chronology.
A boring task, but the benefit of doing it is that you can set the dates !(e.g., why say Khufu lived 2589-2566? As long as you keep the length of his reign correct, or cite a respected source, you can date it 2590-2567 or 2585-2563)
Stub sorting
Anyone? I consider this probably the most unimportant of tasks on Wikipedia, but if you believe it needs to be done . . .
Data sorting.
This is a project I'd like to take on some day, & could be applied to more of Wikipedia than just Ancient Egypt. Take one of the standard authorities of history or culture -- Herotodus, the Elder Pliny, the writings of Breasted or Kenneth Kitchen, & see if you can't smoothly merge quotations or information into relevant articles. Probably a good exercise for someone who owns one of those impressive texts, yet can't get access to a research library.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
When were they transferred to the Egyptian Museum? Y
When were they transferred to Cairo University? Y
It's not stated but I'm assuming that they were buried singly and there were two coffins found, one for each mummy? Y
Coffins:
"were contained within two sets of small mummy-shaped wooden coffins" ... so there's a coffin set for each mummy? And how many nesting coffins in each set? This is confusing. Y
317b:
"as although the umbilical cord is not preserved, the navel was not retracted, indicating that the cord was cut off rather than drying off naturally" this is clunky ... suggest "as indictions are that the cord was cut off rather than drying off naturally." and put the exact details into an explanatory footnote, if it's felt necessary to include. Y
I did some very light copyedits - please make sure they did not change meaning or that I didn't link to the wrong target of an article. Y
I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:00, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Those changes look good, passing this now. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much!! I really appreciate you taking the time to review the article! Merytat3n (talk) 01:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 22:45, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
... that Tutankhamun's infant daughters are unnamed, being referred to only as "the deceased" on their coffins? Source: Carter, Howard (2000). The Tomb of Tut.ankh.amen: The Annexe and Treasury. London: Duckworth. pp. 88–89
Comment: My first ever DYK submission
Improved to Good Article status by Merytat3n (talk). Self-nominated at 11:41, 26 May 2022 (UTC).[reply]
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
Interesting:
QPQ: None required.
Overall: The article itself says that they are called "the Osiris", which differs from the hook. What's the deal with that? resolved casualdejekyll 01:15, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The intro paragraph didn't specify it at the time (which I've fixed - thanks!) but the sentence/quote I'm using does (end of the Coffins section). The title 'the Osiris' identifies the name that usually follows it as someone who is deceased and therefore joined with the god of the dead Osiris. Merytat3n (talk) 09:44, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Honestly, "The Osiris" sounds cooler to me, but I'm not too sure. @Merytat3n: what's your opinion on ALT1: ... that Tutankhamun's infant daughters are unnamed, being referred to only as "the Osiris" on their coffins? Source: Carter, Howard (2000). The Tomb of Tut.ankh.amen: The Annexe and Treasury. London: Duckworth. pp. 88–89 casualdejekyll 16:47, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Casualdejekyll: Yeah I like it! I reckon you are right, its more intriguing this way as readers will have to click through to the article to find out what is meant by 'the Osiris'. Merytat3n (talk) 22:31, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Right! ALT1 is good to go, then!.. I just realized I'm not allowed to approve hooks I proposed myself. Oops. casualdejekyll 22:56, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
_01.svg){kind=small}
b (citations to reliable sources): 
