Talk:Mask of Agamemnon
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
I beefed up this article and removed the stub, as any editor can do. If anyone disagrees, just revert it.Dave 17:28, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
this is the stupidest thing ever and its not this article it when you put BCE it just does not make since it should be B.C. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 02:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Actually, B.C.E. (Before the Common Era) is perfectly acceptable when speaking archaeologically. I feel as though one as uneducated as yourself - quite apparently unable to spell or use proper grammar - is not warranted in either commenting in such a disparaging manner or claiming anything as incorrect when it comes to such a science that is generally reserved for the highly educated, as obviously the person who wrote this article originally, and myself, are.
I feel that people have changed date formats simply for their own tastes rather than sticking with the original format used, in this case BC/AD. I know that it is becoming more common to use BCE/CE, however there has to be discussion for why the date format is to be changed and consensus reached. In this case, none of the criteria were even attempted and as such the original format will be restored. Also, there is no need to call someone uneducated over their opinion of date formats. I am currently studying Classical Civilisations at Leeds University (3rd Year) and use BC/AD format since I started school. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 15:41, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
making such a point of calling someone 'stupid' for no apparent reason, while boasting about your own supposed smartness, just makes you come of as a buffoon. as for the bc/bce debat: as far as i'm concerned the whole bce thing is just completely misdirected political correctness (trying to be sensitive to any non-christian by removing the 'christ' from dates. but still keeping the bc/ad date-format as 'the world wide standard', which is even *more* insulting to everybody using a different calendar) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 00:23, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
really? does anyone know anything about the actual construction? because 'hewn' doesn't really make much sense in this context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 02:17, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
I'm working on editing this article for a school assignment. It's my first time editing an article on wikipedia, so I am making liberal use of the talk page to communicate as clearly as possible with any other contributors who might stop by and take a look at what's going on. I like the fact that there are some unanswered questions floating here to direct my search, and I lol'ed a little bit at the discussion of what constitutes acceptable parameters for debate on the internet. I would just like to add my personal view that whenever we argue on the internet, everyone loses.
Some potential sources I would like to use to add more information to this article are;
This article which describes the dimensions of the mask
This article which is a little more specific about the method of production
And one more to say where the mask is currently located. I will be starting to work out the edits I want to make to the article in my sandbox very soon, in case anyone is interested in knowing more about where I am going with my edit.