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.
We should have an article on every Pharaoh & every nome in Ancient Egypt. Let's check to see if every important Egyptologist has an article. I'm sure the rest of us can think of other articles we should have.
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)
Anyone? I consider this probably the most unimportant of tasks on Wikipedia, but if you believe it needs to be done . . .
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 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.
There is a lot on the history, but little on the art history here. Johnbod (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
I have been away from the article for some time, but I notice that my comment above was picked up, but not followed up, in the GA review. Just to be clear, the article still has virtually nothing on the role and context of the bust within Egyptian royal portraiture, which is indeed very much the focus of its current excellent presentation in Berlin, and which I would expect to take up a large part of a good article on the subject. I don't think the article meets GA standards in its current state for this reason. Johnbod (talk) 18:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
The exact role and context of the bust within Egyptian royal portraiture is unknown. "The exact function of the bust is unknown, though it is theorized that the bust may be a sculptor's model."--RedtigerxyzTalk 12:22, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
That is not the same thing at all! Johnbod (talk) 13:28, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Can you please show a sample para discussing the issue in another article/webpage so I can understand what you really want to see in the article? --RedtigerxyzTalk 13:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
You are writing an article on a single artwork from a rather distant culture, but have no art historical material on the lengthy and much-discussed artistic tradition from which the object comes, which should be a major element of the article. You don't even link to our Portraiture in Ancient Egypt, which is not a bad place to start (not that they seem to link here either). Other stuff quickly found online is here and here. No doubt there is plenty more. That the sculpture was a reference model for use in the studio seems fairly generally assumed, and might be stated more strongly. Johnbod (talk) 14:03, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
please explain WHY the statue was made in the this section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 03:37, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Although the translation (German Oriental Company/Society) is right, the institution (Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft (DMG)) is not correct. It was the Deutsche Orient-Gesellschaft (DOG), of which one of the founders was James Simon himself, the lone sponsor of the Amarna excavation in 1912/13. The DOG was established in Berlin, as the DMG was in Leipzig. The DOG is still in Berlin.
You may find some more information about the DOG here:
There is confusion when the bust was first displayed, some sources say 1923, some 1924. 1924 is now used in the article. I am confused. Some someone find reliable references? --RedtigerxyzTalk 15:16, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
This may be a reliable reference about the first display of the bust:
see page 286 and note 24: The bust was presented to the public in Borchardt’s text on the Nefertiti portrait, dated 1923 but published in 1924, as well as through the exhibition of the bust beginning in March; see Krauss, ‚1913-1988, p. 100
I hope, this helps. A footnote could be added to explain the two dates. --Sat Ra (talk) 09:59, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
P. S. I am sorry, I failed to receive the work of Krauss to which is referred to so many times. While I am still working on the German version I will keep a steady eye on this important thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sat Ra (talk • contribs) 09:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. incorporated in the text. --RedtigerxyzTalk 15:18, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
I have made a number of minor copy-edits, mostly to avoid repetitive phrasing. Please check.
CT scans: The CT scan in 2006 – led by Alexander Huppertz, the director of the Imaging Science Institute in Berlin, revealed a wrinkled face of Nefertiti carved in the inner core of the bust. I find this somewhat unclear. The phrase carved in the inner core of the bust. suggests that somehow a there is a secret inner sculpture. Could you try to rephrase this for clarity?Y
Yes. There was a secret inner sculptures like wrinkles, which was coated by stucco. --RedtigerxyzTalk 15:27, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
The 2009 scan provided greater detail than the 1992 one – revealing subtle details just 1–2 mm under the stucco. I thought that the second scan was in 2006 according to an earlier sentence. Or was there a third scan in 2009? If so then that should be stated.Y
I note the comment on the talk page re the art history. There really isn't much of this in the article. Is there more that can be sourced?
Please let me know what in art history specifically is needed, because the same info may be available in elsewhere in the article, without the title "art history". --RedtigerxyzTalk 16:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
When exactly the bust was created is not known (circa year given). Look and materials including colours are covered (the comment was before this part was added).
The article is nearly there. Please respond re my notes above. I note that the nominator is busy for several days, so I will have a look in a week. On hold. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:09, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
OK, I feel taht the article is now worthy of GA status, although of course there is always more to be done. Passing as GA> Jezhotwells (talk) 19:39, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
The lead is really jumping around. Try to move "The bust has become..." out from between historical info.
No article in dab. Seems to be relevant. --RedtigerxyzTalk 16:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
If none of the links in the dab is the right one, then delink it or pipe to an appropriate redlink.
fixed as well; according to this German article (a portrait) it's Prince Johann Georg of Saxony. Under: Ein Perspektivwechsel it is said: ‘... so wohnte er 1912 der Bergung der Büste der Nofretete bei ...’ (thus he took part at the excavation of the bust of Nefertiti). --Sat Ra (talk) 09:46, 17 December 2009 (UTC)