From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Akhenaten was one of the History good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
December 8, 2005 Good article nominee Listed
July 16, 2008 Good article reassessment Kept
November 4, 2013 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article
This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot. Any sections older than 14 days are automatically archived to Talk:Akhenaten/Archive 2. Sections without timestamps are not archived.


There are 2 entries for him: see also Akhnaten. User:Olivier

Yes but: Akhnaten is the play isnt it? User:Es02

This guy is also Amenophis IV (see, for example History of Egypt). Amenophis doesn't sound at all like Amenothep to me, why the two spellings (or names).

Amenophis is the Greek version of Amenhotep ... which in itself is just a rough transliteration of the hieroglyphic. User:Ffabris

co-rule with Amenhotep III confirmed[edit]

Apparently a new find in Luxor confirmed that Amenhotep IV, alias Akhenaten, did have a period of co-rule with his father Amenhotep III. A mural painting dating from Amenhotep III's Heb Sed shows both pharaoh's together with their names mentioned together. According to the minister of Antiquities Mohamed Ibrahim Ali al-Sayed, this is an important find. Alas I can only find a Dutch language newspaper source: Has anyone a English language source confirming this?-- fdewaele, 6 February 2014, 18:27 CET

Section on Implementation of Atenism and later collapse not a summary of the main article[edit]

This fails WP:SUMMARY when you compare it to the main article, Atenism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talkcontribs) 09:00, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Ideas for cleanup or article expansion[edit]

Apologies if I just missed something but cursory searching doesn't seem to find any mention of Akhenaton's unusual treatment of the "jubilee" / "Sed festival" early in his reign which appears to have been tied to his other reforms and may have been intended to count his previous service as coregent in a way the priests didn't appreciate. See, i.a., Britannica.

More importantly, there doesn't seem to be any mention of the expected completion of the Egyptian calendar's great Sothic cycle soon after his ascension, a return of the calendar—after more than a millennium of wandering—to a New Year aligned with Sirius, the Nile flood, and (roughly) the summer solstice. (Not sure, but the backward approach of the civil calendar to an alignment with Sirius's heliacal rising may have put New Year at the summer solstice during Akhenaton's own reign.) Schaefer argues that it's not a certain thing but a claim of a completed Sothic cycle during Akhenaten's own reign on political grounds is within the margin of error for the observations involved. — LlywelynII 18:50, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2017[edit]

"Another unfounded claim was made by Immanuel Velikovsky, who hypothesized an incestuous relationship with his mother, Tiye."

The word 'unfounded' should be removed; all the claims are currently unfounded, not just Velikovsky's. 2600:8800:300:3E00:6412:4F41:74B3:75C8 (talk) 01:18, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Not done - removing the word unfounded leaves the reader unsure if it was true or false; as written there is no ambiguity. - Arjayay (talk) 12:46, 17 March 2017 (UTC)