User:AnnekeBart/archive3

AE units

I'll have to admit that looking at the table, the edit made sense. Dougweller (talk) 19:38, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

My bad. You are right. --AnnekeBart (talk) 23:29, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I hope you're pleased with the result on Milogardner, I'm sorry it took so long but maybe that was necessary. Dougweller ([[User

talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 02:58, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Kanefer

Reisner mentiones children of Kanefer. Should I mention this in the article?--Mychele (talk) 09:21, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, if you know the book or article where this is mentioned, then include what he says about them. Giving give the source of the information will add nicely to the list of references. What article does this come from? I'm curious :-) There are some articles via JSTOR that mention Kanefer, but I have not had time to include that information in the Kanefer page yet. --AnnekeBart (talk) 11:43, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

OK. Reisner concluded that Kanefer was really Snefru's son, but his mother is unknown. Should we mentioned this opinion of scholar?

Senet

Wasn't Senet or Sent word for sister? Sen is a brother, then we add et and that give us sister. --Mychele (talk) 08:46, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

If you're talking about the game senet, then that is not what is meant. It's written as zn.t n.t ḥˁb according to the wikipedia article Senet. Even if it may sound like the word for sister, then that does not mean it was written the same way or was meant to convey a similar meaning. --AnnekeBart (talk) 11:09, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

GP worker's village

Hi-I would disagree that the information I provided should be relegated only to the other article and not mentioned in the GP article. In fact, I think it is dishonest not to do so because without it by association with the main article is "stating" that the worker's camp was for the GP as well but this is not true.

And what you have done is removed something you don't like which you say shouldn't be in the main article then go on and on at length about something that gives the exact opposite POV, but has no business being in the main article for the same reasons. You can edit things however you will, just be honest with yourself and others.Thanos5150 (talk) 17:33, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I did not add anything that claims the worker's village excavated by Lehner dates to the time of Khufu. You must be confusing me with someone else. So far the worker's village excavated by Lehner (which is an ongoing excavation) has only provided materials dated to the reigns of Khafre and Menkaure. There are however other excavations (different location) which show the existence of at least artisan villages dating to the time of Khufu. Considering the fact that between Khufu and Khafre, Djedefre moved the necropolis to Abu Rawash finding different settlements/worker's villages at separate locations from before and after that move is none too surprising.

The other edits you mention are with regards to the pyramid complex of Khufu and hence relevant. Your edits concern finds related to the complexes of Khafre and Menkaure and thus are not relevant. If you are so concerned then have a conversation on a talkpage that goes with the article instead of attacking other editors. --AnnekeBart (talk) 17:50, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

You are right, it was Doug Weller, my apologies. You reversion was right after all his. The problem is that as the edit was before it made no mention of the fact the workers town is not related to Khufu or the Great Pyramid and by omitting these facts gave the clear impression, nigh statement of fact especially considering it is here in the GP article, that this was the worker's town for Great Pyramid which it is not. In fact, for all we really know it may not even be a worker's town for the "pyramid builders" at all. These are important facts to just overlook and by doing so seems dishonest. I am not blaming you personally, but as is often the case a debunker for debunker's sake like Doug Weller will not "edit", but entirely chop out material he does not agree with within minutes of it being posted day or night, but by the same token not correct a painfully obvious error or omission because it supports his POV. So, if I "attack" other editors it is only from being attacked myself. The source material I provided was from Mark Lehner himself and all of what was written was either a direct quote from the source or a statement of fact from the information provided by Lehner. And yet this is not edited for wording, I am not given the benefit of the doubt under discussion, it is chopped out entirely and replaced with examples of Khufu's name being found in other locations on the Giza plateau. The workers camp has no evidence of Khufu therefore we must ignore it and replace it with examples of sites at Giza that do? Come on now.

So far, you mean 17yrs and 43 months of excavation? And is the artisan village really dated to the time of Khufu, say with supporting material like carbon dating or pottery styles, or is it just the fact seals were found with his name? I'm not saying there wasn't other material, but a name does not date a site, and also an "artisan's village" is hardly a launching pad for building a building like the GP regardless of it's date nor does it mean it was associated with actual pyramid building. Djedfre may have moved his pyramid to Abu Rawash, so indeed one would expect to find a worker's camp there as well, but the Great Pyramid is right next to the other two Giza Pyramids so it only stands to reason whatever infrastructure to be found to support it's construction would be right there at Giza. Ancient peoples are notorious for reusing and rebuilding on the same site again and again, so it is odd to say the least that they would completely up and move the worker's camp somewhere else.

I'm not trying to hassle you, just clarifying my position. Have a wonderful day.Thanos5150 (talk) 23:05, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Rekhetre

Do you know translation of queen's name Rekhetre? It is connected to Ra?--Mychele (talk) 13:10, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

No, I do not know the translation of the name. I looked at Ranke, but Cannot find the translation. My guess is that it means something like "Knowing Ra" --AnnekeBart (talk) 17:27, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

OK, maybe she is just POSSIBLY His mother, but the name of Persenet really means "sister's house" or "house of sister". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.136.50.7 (talk) 13:53, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Can you give a source for that translation? I find it rather hard to believe it is really known. Given that the name is a reconstruction and that the spelling is not known for sure. And the reconstructed name does NOT use the sign for sister. --AnnekeBart (talk) 15:28, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Enthusiasm is good. So, we can agree - you can wrote the truth, but I am here to make a style like wiki. And marks must be putted on right places, categories and links, infoboxes and images must be placed right. This will my duty. See Persenet. I prefer that I can edit wiki style of articles and thus help to you.--Mychele (talk) 16:27, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Dear Anneke, if someone is not against you, then he/she is for you. Don't be angry on me. There is no reason for that. We can work together here, we just need agreement. I would always put links etc. You can always see my articles when I wrote them, and I will always see yours (maybe you made some mistakes in anguage, or maybe we need to put .,:" etc.). Team work is good, so why are you against it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.138.69.15 (talk) 09:21, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Upon my recent unblocking, I am glad to say that now better times for all of us are coming. Hovewer, we shoud put anger on the other side. I think I don't need tutor or mentor, but rather someone ike you who will check what I wrote about AE in new articles (I will write something new) and in the old (for exampe, if some is new discovered, then is hard to believe that this will be in some book, we must use pages in that case). In hope that you will embrace a good oportunity,

--Mychele (talk) 08:38, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

You really made excellent new changes n the articles.--93.139.58.15 (talk) 16:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Re: Nefertkau III and Reisner

Hello there:

I saw that you just added some material to this page, after having listed it to the Ancient Egypt Watchlist‎. A lot of the work that Reisner did at Giza are now available online through the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston's Giza Archive [1], which includes full articles and pictures. I have been delving into this archive to help me with the Reserve head article I am slowly working on, which have all been found on the Giza plateau in the same general area as the mastaba mentioned in the Nefertkau III article. I can find a few matches on the general name, though you would have to go digging further to see if the matches are for the right "Nefertkau". Cheers! Captmondo (talk) 19:07, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I have been using the Giza Archives as well. I will look up Nefertkau I when I have a bit more time. I have found looking up the tomb number very useful. The page for the tomb comes with a bibliography and links to the online files if available. Funny you mention it, because I was reading the page about the reserve heads recently. Those are really fascinating items. I enjoyed reading the material provided. There's quite a bit of info in Porter and Moss about the reserve heads. There are quite a few of them apparently. --AnnekeBart (talk) 20:45, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the works by Porter and Moss ("Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Statues, Reliefs, and Paintings"). Haven't gone looking for them as yet but am hoping that their material is available on JStor. Cheers! Captmondo (talk) 13:41, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Porter and Moss is on the Giza Archives as well. I will add some info to the page. --AnnekeBart (talk) 14:52, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Minkhaf II

Hello AnnekeBart. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Minkhaf II, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. ϢereSpielChequers 12:54, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Rawer

Hello AnnekeBart. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Rawer, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. ϢereSpielChequers 12:55, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree that these two princes - Minkaf and Rauer - are not important. We should simply redirect these pages onto article about their father.--Mychele (talk) 13:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Translation

I am really impressed with your new articles and I wanna help you to improve them. Can I use them to translate them on Croatian wikipedia? Is that legal?--Mychele (talk) 13:58, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mychele. I think it's ok to translate from one wiki to another. There are some things you should do however per WP:Translation. Quoting from that page: "Because Wikipedia licensing requires attribution, the translation source must be credited to avoid copyright violation. Attribution in the edit summary and placing the template {{Translated page}} on the article talk page are the recommended ways to credit the source of the translation. (See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.)" --AnnekeBart (talk) 19:51, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Khamerernebty II

Was Khamerernebty II proposed as a mother of Shepseskaf? Did she had title of king's mother?--Mychele (talk) 13:01, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I have never seen any author that suggests that Khamerernebty II was the mother of Shepseskaf. They really do not know how Shepseskaf was related to the royal family I think. --AnnekeBart (talk) 04:10, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

I usually wrote princess and not king's daughter. Is that correct or should I change this? Michelle —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.136.94.219 (talk) 09:03, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

New articles

Hello AnnekeBart. While patrolling new pages, I've seen a number of your Egyptology pages appearing. As you have created quite a few new articles, why don't you apply for autopatrolled permission? Regards. Jimmy Pitt talk 17:03, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Sahure

My dear Anne, I wrote in Sahure the same thing as you did now. I really can't understand why did you put changes because style and not information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.136.8.39 (talk) 17:27, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

The change was to correct the wrong source being used. It was not about the content. --AnnekeBart (talk) 00:50, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Anne. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. I has planed to say this earlier, but I had a problem with my computer. Cheers!--Mychele (talk) 08:39, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I think we should mention Khufu in Meresankh I's article 'cause he was a king too, like her own son Sneferu.--Mychele (talk) 10:07, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Anne, please do not be mad on me! It's a New Year! We should make some agreements and decisions - I will TRY to follow your steps and advices. But if I see any mistake in article, I will always do something to fix it. We should not argue, but rather try to find a common language. And this is easy. I am here to be friend to you, no to argue.--Mychele (talk) 18:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Good job at Nefermaat!--Mychele (talk) 12:59, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I am starting to use your style of editing and writing. Please, don't mind. Using your style I get completly different view: Khentkaus II and Kentkaus II.--Mychele (talk) 17:36, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Is Reptynub a daughter or wife of Nyuserre Ini? In Khentkaus' article, you stated she is Khentkaus' grand-daughter. In Nyuserre's page she is his wife. And how much children did he had? Different information cames from pages of Khentkaus II, Nyuserre Ini and Reptynub.--Mychele (talk) 14:57, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Logograms in the Habiru article

Regarding removing the logograms in the Habiru aarticle: If you don't have a font that contains cuneiform, then the logograms won't show, just as if you don't have a font that contains cyrillic, hebrew, or eastern european characters, they won't show either. For those who have any of these, these are useful. Many of the articles which discuss Sumerian and Akkadian persons/entities include the cuneiform equivalent (for example, the Enki article). Sumerian and Akkadian Cuneiform is covered in the unicode blocks of U+12000–U+1236E and U+12400–U+12473 (another block may be added in the future due to some missing logograms which were not included around 2004). — al-Shimoni (talk) 15:47, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

I understand that there are places where one needs to have the appropriate fonts installed. In the Enki article you mentioned I can see that there is "code" there that will result in the correct logogram for those who have the fonts installed. In the Habiru article that was not the case for as far as I can see. This is why I mentioned looking at the source code of the page. Enki's name is generated by <span style="font-size:125%;font-family:Akkadian, 'Free Idg Serif';" title="cuneiform text">𒂗𒆠</span>) I.e it defines that it's Akkadian. And I can see two "blocks" with codes where the actual logogram would be. The text on the Habiru page had no such coding to define it.

If there is something more subtle going on and I'm wrong, then I'm sorry about my confusion. --AnnekeBart (talk) 18:59, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. I did ask in the talk page if there was a language code that would be appropriate (something along the lines of the {lang-xx} template, xx being replaced with the 2 letter code for the language). I would think there is a code for Sumerian at this point, but whether Wiki knows of it and can handle it is another. Maybe have to do a trial and error.

    I was considering, even as I was adding the text they appeared in, whether it might be better to include an image to aligned to the left to show the SA.GAZ cuneiform, that way it was independent of whether someone had an appropriate font or not. Something that would have been better would be something like Wiki's <hiero> tag that lets you enter gardiner codes, and wiki assembles an appropriately formatted set of images from it. However, I doubt that Wiki has plans of adding such a tag for cuneiform anytime in the near future.

    Do you think my adding of an image aligned to the left showing SA.GAZ in cuneiform would be appropriate? — al-Shimoni (talk) 21:14, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

I think an image would be great in this case. This article will be read by enough people that do not have the appropriate fonts installed and the mention of the SA.GAZ is something that is interesting. The idea that SA.GAZ is just a notation used to represent the fact that the name of these people was written using a "SA" logogram, followed by a "GAZ" logogram would be nicely illustrated by the image. Do we know if the SA logogram is (possibly) read as something like ha(b) and the GAZ logogram as piru? --AnnekeBart (talk) 21:51, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

I'll try to put something together real soon. If SA is not just a shortening of another logogram (such as SAG meaning to "strike the head"), it could mean "cord." GAZ can mean "kill", so together it might mean "strangler/murderer," or thug (just one of the many theories). There is some indication that it may have been intended to be pronounced ḫabbatum by how it is sometimes used to play off of words with a similar sound, but this isn't certain (the -m is a grammatical ending similar to the -n ending in classical Arabic nouns which are no longer pronounced in modern Arabic, but still often pronounced liturgically). Similarly along this line, in other places, where one would expect to see SA.GAZ written, you have ḫabbatum instead. But, again, there is a lot of room where it could not be the case. If I feel really proactive, I may just move that one subsection down into a full section, and go into the various theories about what SA.GAZ, habiru, ḫabbitum, and other variations may have meant (there are a lot of possibilities, and it would be rather difficult to fit all the major ones into just a small handful of sentences). If I do that, then I'd like to be able to cite at least a few sources that are freely available online (not just ones that you have to go to a library for or have to pay to see online — a sad fact of many journals articles currently online). — al-Shimoni (talk) 00:12, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Cambyses II

You stated " When Cambyses II of Persia invaded Egypt, he exhumed Amasis' body, desecrated it and burned what remained of the mummy. " Source please? On what basis? Dr. Persi (talk) 13:22, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I found this http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/amasis.htm which is not a reliable source as it is, well, it is "Tour Egypt" a website, and so I am not so sure why that is even used as a source in this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amasis_II#cite_note-9

I did not see anything that Herodotus said regarding the manner of his death. Is there a reliable literature source, or a referrence to Herodotus for this claim? Because it could very well be a POV made fact by some website. The same issue, I guess, that I saw with certain websites making unsupported claims for Persian figures. So ya please let me know what you think and if you can support that claim. Thanks! Dr. Persi (talk) 13:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, so the text is supposedly also supported by Herodotus in Book III, Chapter 16 (based on the source). I tried to find it and all I found is how Herodotus describes Amasis as a drunk and an iconoclast. It is interesting cuz apparently as per Herodotus, Cambyses asked for Amasis's daughter's hand in marriage, and instead Amasis sent a fake, the daugher of a man whose mother he had killed, and of course the girl who was sent gave Amasis up, royally making Cambyses mad. Phanes, later on a physician who worked with Amasis and was mistreated with him also gave negative reports about Amasis, pretty much making it a confrontation. Apparently, Psammenitus, the son and heir to Amasis, was himself a brute, since he brought Phanes' two sons, killed them, choped them up, and mixed their blood with wine and had himself a "bloody mary!" http://books.google.com/books?id=YLZjAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA195&dq=death+of+Amasis+Herodotus&hl=en&ei=Z040TaXbCIW0lQe077S2Cg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CFMQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=death%20of%20Amasis%20Herodotus&f=false

However this source does cite, that Amasis died before Cambyses could get to him and experienced "savage rage." so it seems plausible however, it should also probably be noted that Amasis was as per Herodotus famouse for his drinking fits! Interesting stuff! I guess it is true..haha they really pissed Cambyses off :P Dr. Persi (talk) 14:18, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I cannot find the resource I found that more detailed description in. It does say in Dodson and Hilton (Royal genealogies) that Cambyses desecrated Amasis' tomb, killed the Apis Bull and despoiled some of the temples. LOL It does seem Cambyses was royally pissed off. I looked in Kenneth Kitchen's book about the Third Intermediate Period and can't find the details about what Cambyses did exactly. I very rarely pull anything from websites because they are not reliable. And I would not have used Touregypt as a source. I would be happy to shorten the statement to "Herodotus claims that when Cambyses II invaded Egypt he desecrated the tomb of Amasis II" and reference that with Dodson and Hilton. But I am fine with the way you edited as well :) It is made clear that this is coming from Herodotus. --AnnekeBart (talk) 15:07, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

By the way, you are absolultey right. I read the whole Book III last night and Herodotus actually does mention that! So it is very true. Feel free to twick things around. And again, cheers and love to read more of your wonderful additions :) Dr. Persi (talk) 21:40, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Hetepheres I

I have some questions on the talk page for Hetepheres I. Since it seems you wrote most of the text, perhaps you could take a look? Or should I repost the questions here? Jpg1954 (talk) 21:41, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Nefertiti

I'm a little angry that you reverted my edit without the courtesy of any discussion. I did not remove hiero, I changed the info box from the ?German? wiki one to the one common to the en.wiki. I retained the hiero in the main text. Pleased explain why you think (a) it's ok to revert an edit made in good faith without any discussion and (b) why you choose to use the non-standard info box. Tattooed Librarian (talk) 22:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, you had just undone some work that I had done. So I could also ask why you changed that without discussion? But my point was not to offend anyone. I think the infobox did not and does not add anything to the page. The end result was list of children right next to the list of children in the article for instance. The long list of titles is not something that is a standard inclusion in any infobox was another observation on my part. I do understand it was a good faith edit on your part. And on my side it was as well. The hieroglyph box I included has been used in several articles and so is not as non-standard as you seem to think it is (at least IMO). It is actually standard use in all German wikipedia pages. I personally think that one makes much more sense. Regards --AnnekeBart (talk) 23:53, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Thomas, Lord of Coucy

Did you use this book for the Thomas,_Lord_of_Coucy#Family section? Smallman12q (talk) 18:55, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

To a small extent: yes. I also used this site. The book dates back to 1845, so a bit long in the tooth :). But it does support at least part of the family history. --AnnekeBart (talk) 19:19, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

How are you, Anneke? Happy Valentine's day!--Mychele (talk) 08:02, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

About me

Hi there! Please, let me introduce myself! I´m 30 years old and an total geek about early dynastic egypt and carnivorous plants. Nice to meet you!^^ I please ye also to be keen about my lousy English. I learned school english from 5th class on (pretty late so), just later I learned a little "pub-english". Talking would be no problem, but writing.... So all I can do is to please you and yer collegues to see over maybe-occuring typos.

About websites. In german Wikipedia we are even careful with Francesco Raffaele, since we unfortunately found out, that Francesco often messes up literaric source informations (he spells wrong pages or missreads the correct names of Egyptologists). I for myself have no problems to counter-read his sources (especially the german ones^^), so I wouldn´t have big problems with him, but my collegues don´t like him since we had a big mess to counter-read and correct his source informations several times and so they allow me to use Francesco´s page only for drawing seal impressions and vessel inscriptions.

About drawings: please look Chaba, Sechemib and Qahedjet for seen examples of my drawings. Maybe they are good enough for your Wiki, too? I´m just doing this because we have so often problems to recieve the original fotos or drawings. I alway give the exact source where I found the artwork to avoid the impression of phantazised paintings.

Omg, I wrote too much!^^ Thank you for your offering to help. It feels good to me. ;-) sweet greetings;--Nephiliskos (talk) 22:56, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the intro :-) I really like your drawings! I think they are definitely good enough to use as illustrations. And I think you're right, as long as there is plenty of info about the source of the image and where the original object is located, texts and images can be verified. I noticed you also have a drawing of the Djeseretnebti label? It was not available on wikimedia commons however. I noticed something about copyright only extending to Germany? It would be very nice to include that one in the article because it illustrates the issue about nebti name of a king versus personal name of a queen. --AnnekeBart (talk) 13:30, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Copyright only for Germany? Hey, that´s patriotism! :-D But if they are really good enough, I´ll ask an administrator for moving the files, so that en.Wikipedia can use them, too. greetings;--Nephiliskos (talk) 17:22, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

New picture! ;-) greetings;--Nephiliskos (talk) 00:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Khenthap

Hi there. This lady gonna be my next "victim". I hope this is okay. greetings;--Nephiliskos (talk) 17:41, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I like the added detail, but I think you should try to retain some of the old text and definitely try to avoid deleting the references like you ended up doing in this article :-). Think of it as adding to the article instead of replacing the materials?? I think the more references to (a variety of) literature the better. --AnnekeBart (talk) 18:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Maybe you´re right. I´ll let my eyes pass on it and shall I find reasons not to set the adds back, I tell you, ok? Otherwise I´ll put them in again. greetings; --Nephiliskos (talk) 22:37, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I see you did already. But I´m a bit concerned that most of the articles about early dynastic queens sound too "factive". We shall not forget or ignore that Egyptologists always admonish that most "knowlege" of this ladies is speculative and that archeological evidences for most theories are still missing. So I think it not good to write "it is", I think it´s better to write "it may be" or "possibly". Or alternatively we write whom´s theory it is. I hope I didn´t sound to snobbish now, It´s really ment well-meaning, ok? dear greetings;--Nephiliskos (talk) 08:14, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I absolutely agree with you. I often put in the "possibly" or other wording that indicates when there is some doubt. I just rewrote Seshemetka yesterday and did pretty much what you are describing. For some of these early individuals all we sometimes have is educated guesses. --AnnekeBart (talk) 13:11, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

To explain why I made some references disappear: I haven´t read some of the books and I just didn´t wanna recite from books I´ve never consulted. greetings;--Nephiliskos (talk) 15:06, 24 February 2011 (UTC)PS: it may be a stupid question, but why does no article in en.Wikipedia exist about king Athotis I./Teti I.????

But those references are put in there by people who have read them (like me), so it's better to leave them in place :-) Re: Athotis? Maybe he appears under another name? I would have to look that up.--AnnekeBart (talk) 18:48, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok, ok! I leave them!^-^ About Athotis I.: Look here. There´s an article about this king, where all theories of egyptology are described. Besides: Here´s a drawing of mine that shows the ink inscription of Djefatnebty. dear greetings; --Nephiliskos (talk) 19:37, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Happy Woman Day! I am impressed with your work on List of Egyptians. Is there any way how to I help you? - Mychele, greetings —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.136.147.99 (talk) 18:29, 8 March 2011 (UTC)