User talk:Ploversegg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Chronology of the ancient Near East needs footnotes[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. I appreciate your work on Chronology of the ancient Near East. Could I ask you to please footnote your work?? The editors and readers need to be able to link back a qualified published reference. See Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Footnotes for more details. Thanks, and welcome! MapMaster (talk) 16:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Kings pages categories[edit]

Hi Ploversegg,

I don't know of any standard formats for kings' pages, but the only category you really need for a king's page is xxx kings/xxx people/xxx rulers, whichever there is for that group. These sub-categories are including in all the larger categories, so including larger categories such as Ancient Near East is not necessary. (And if every single article were included in that big category, it would become sort of unnavigable.) And perhaps you could also create some sort of subpage in the Chronology category for the ANE chronology stuff, because that covers a lot of ground as well (although that's not really my field).

Sumerophile (talk) 18:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Query about the Old Assyrian kingdom.[edit]

Ploversegg, do you have any information about the Old Assyrian kingdom (Shamshi-Adad I et al)? I notice you haven't edited the Kings of Assyria page and that's the only list of OA kings I can find. Blueberrybuttermilkpancakes (talk) 02:23, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm also confused about the Assyrian Middle kingdom on the Chronology page because I can't find Tiglath-Pileser I. Maybe I'm missing something?... Blueberrybuttermilkpancakes (talk) 03:03, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, information on early Assyrian chronlogy is pretty sketchy. For example, Shamshi-Adad I wasn't even Assyrian. He was an Amorite who built a nice but short empire in the area (including Mari) and Ashur was became a vassal state of that. Then the Assyrians co-opted him into their king list. So ... thats why it's not in the Chronology article, which is designed for stuff with firm attestation. A non-wiki site which does a fair job of covering that is

at least they are pretty good at ruler order etc.

As for Tiglath-Pileser I, he falls into the iffy "dark ages" between the Middle Assyrian and Neo-Assyrian kindoms where chrono data is almost as sketchy as for the Old Assyrian rulers. The wiki page for him Tiglath-Pileser I, has some stuff which "may" be right, we just don't know for sure. Ploversegg (talk) 18:03, 5 May 2008 (UTC)ploversegg

If you have a chance, could you take a look at the "Assyria" section of the ANE portal topics page[1], and check the dates, and add any more notable rulers, if there are any? Blueberrybuttermilkpancakes (talk) 03:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I left some comments on the portal discussion page todo list btw. Ploversegg (talk) 15:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC)ploversegg


Just stopping by with cookies for those editors who started new articles today. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Chronology of the Ancient Near East[edit]

There was some discussion that the Chronology of the ancient Near East needed to be returned to its planned purpose as dealing with the short vs long etc controversies of ANE chronology and splitting of the dynasty ruler stuff to some sort of timeline article. Can we come to some sort of resolution/decision on the future of the article so I can continue to work on it?

I'm fine with whatever but the uncertainty makes it difficult to know how to proceed. As I understand it the choices are

  • Leave things the way they are
  • Rename Chronology of the Ancient Near East to, say, Timeline of the

Ancient Near East and revert the CANE to what is was before I started working on it and start from there

  • Split off part of CANE into a new article, say Timeline of the ANE

and leave part in the old article.

  • Something Else

Am going to drop this note is several places, including my talk page Ploversegg (talk) 18:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC)ploversegg

Great Minds[edit]

think alike! ;-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Historicpastime (talkcontribs) 00:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

If you know how to make it invisible, feel free. Historicpastime (talk) 00:59, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Added link on Portal page and made the bot hook hidden on the project page (changing link to
go straight to ANE cleanup list vs ancient hist list. Feel free to tweak either.Ploversegg (talk) 23:53, 1 August 2008 (UTC)ploversegg


I tried to figure out the referencing in the article by looking up some of the other pages. For Eshnunna: please see Second millennium BC which starts at 1000 and ends at 1999 BC. I thought for sure the article was referencing 2100 to 2200 BC which are at the beginning of the Third millennium BC. Thus the article was off by a 1000 years since they were referring to the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC which is 1100 to 1200. (From the SonoranDesert-hots)... of ArizonaUSA)... and "Cheers"!... --Mmcannis (talk) 04:31, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Close, but completely backwards. :-)
Millenium BC begin in their year 1000 (or 999) and end at their year 1 (or zero). For example,
look at the end of the bronze age section of Second millennium BC that you mentioned, that
says that barbarians came at the END of the 2nd millenennium. Similarly, the first babylonian
empire i.e. hamurabi, was in the EARLY 2nd millenium. So yes, you are right that the extent
of the 3rd millenium BC is 2000 BC to 3000 BC, for example, but it BEGINS in 3000 BC (or perhaps
2999BC). No big, just a common mistake for people not used to counting
years downward as in the time of BC land.Ploversegg (talk) 04:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)ploversegg

Mari rulers[edit]

Ploversegg, do you have a list of Mari rulers? Historicpastime (talk) 01:12, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Hm, AFAIK, there is only really historical information about Mari in two periods (plus some vague guess that a couple of the early Kassite kings ruled there while they controlled Mari before the move to Babylon).

The first period was circa 2300 when they were an independent power for a bit before they were taken over by Ebla then by Akkad. The problem with that part is the there is a question whether known rulers of Mari were Kings or governors under Ebla. See but I decided there wasn't enough there to put in the timeline.

On the other hand, the period leading up to the capture(possibly the destruction) of Mari by Hamurabi. Clearly Zimri-LiM is well known. The line before him is not certain, but is sem-known. Basically, there were some rulers, then Samsi-Adad place a governor in Mari, then Zimri-Lim began.

Yasmah-Adad son of Shamshi-Adad I

Note that these are spelled various ways, and there possible another guy before Yasmah-Adad called Sumu-Yamam. This is not a bad web page

but I have NO IDEA where they got the ruler names other than for the two periods I mentioned.

Some good background on this is in # The King and I a Mari King in Changing Perceptions, Jack M. Sasson, Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 118, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1998), pp. 453-470 which I meant to add (along with the above PDF) to the Mari page but forgot to. :-) Ploversegg (talk) 16:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)ploversegg

Thanks, I figured as much. I'll add them to Mari anyway in two charts, even if it's not much, because I keep coming across them wrt other kings and wanting to look up the context. Historicpastime (talk) 01:28, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


Mostly I've been using the "people" category for long-dead people, unless their floruit spans a century boundary in a way that makes a death category less awkward. I.e. if they were known to be active 1722-1745, "18th century people" seems like the right category, but if they were known to be active 1798-1803, then "19th century deaths" is the most obvious single category. In a few cases it also depends on what the article says; i.e. if it says that someone ruled until 1798 at which point they were assassinated, then "1798 deaths" is known; otherwise it's unclear how long they lived after being deposed if at all. As for why I'm adding them in the first place, mostly for subset-retrieval purposes; e.g. for external tools to be able to say, "give me all biographies of people who lived between the 18th and 14th centuries BC". --Delirium (talk) 22:07, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Coordinate templates[edit]

You recently created Tarbisu, using {{coor title dm}}. That template is deprecated, and should not be used. Please use {{coord}}, instead. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 00:22, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I updated my prototype so future articles will use the new template.Ploversegg (talk) 00:45, 30 December 2008 (UTC)ploversegg

make Uruk A-class[edit]

I would like to take the Uruk article to A-class status. Any suggestions? I don't understand why it is still rated B-class. I should say that I have no access to any books, so there is not much I can do to add content at this point.--Gurdjieff (talk) 11:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree, it has improved enough to be a A-class article. I can touch up the Archaeology section, add a few more inline references. And maybe touch up the rulers section too. Unfortuneately, a lot of the books and papers on Uruk are in German which I can't really read. Anyway, feel free to update to A the article categories.Ploversegg (talk) 22:23, 10 July 2009 (UTC)ploversegg

invalid geocoordinates[edit]

The coordinates you added to Chagar Bazar are invalid because the number of minutes in the latitude (85) is greater than sixty. Perhaps you meant 36.85 degrees north instead of 36 degrees 85 minutes north. Please check your sources and fix the coordinates in the article. --Stepheng3 (talk) 02:34, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix. --Stepheng3 (talk) 16:29, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


Anno Domini is the article that Before Christ redirects to. You're probably right because history isn't my thing, I was just cleaning up the BC disambiguation page but assumed third millennium BC meant third millennium Before Christ? Jevansen (talk) 23:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Cool. I was mostly just amused by the watchlist note that came with the change. :-) Ploversegg (talk) 05:40, 19 March 2010 (UTC)ploversegg

Names of sites[edit]

I already started this discussion once on the ANE project page, but I never got a reply, so I ask you since you seem to be doing a lot of ANE editing. Do you know if there has ever been a discussion on naming conventions of sites? There seems to be no convention on whether they are named by their current or historical name (Nagar, Syria vs Tell Leilan, for example). I understand why sites like Babylon and Mari are named as they are, but otherwise I would go for the current name, especially since many tells were occupied during periods for which we do not know the name (Tell Brak would be a good example) or for which more than one ancient name is known (Tell Leilan). Zoeperkoe (talk) 20:49, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

There is no good answer to this question. I'll give you a semi-answer. 1) When I create a new article for a location with a known ancient name which was occupied for a single period like Mashkan-shapir or Nabada or some of the towns built by Kassite and Neo-Assyrian kings and then promptly abandoned then I use that name. 2) If there is no known name and a well recognized "archaeological" name and no associated modern town larger than a flyspeck that is not a magnet for loons I'll use that. Some modern towns are subject to constant wiki-attacks by nationalists and those with political interests and if you name the site article with such a name it will be trashed. 3) If it is part of or has been subsumed in modern times by a modern city I would make it a section of the cities page, like if I did an article on tell mohamed which is now within the city limits of Baghdad. 4) It does have a known ancient name but there are Significant remains of a different period which haven't been dug yet and might reveal a major city name, Akkad for example, I hold fire and use the "archaeological" name, Tell Whatever. 5)If it has a "classic" name like Larsa or Nippur then I would say that should apply out of tradition. Well, can you tell I've just been playing it by ear? If you have a more coherent plan I would be happy to work with it.Ploversegg (talk) 23:23, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Thought so. I would go with option 4, period, but then again, there are probably already few people who recognize Mari, let alone Tell Hariri, and sites like Babylon and Nineveh consist of multiple tells/sites so that isn't going to work either. So, no, I have no workable coherent plan, but I would for example change Nagar to Tell Brak (which is probably the more well-known name anyway), and I get from your informal guidelines that you would do that as well. I think I can live with yours, they sound pretty reasonable, I might use them whenever I am in doubt on a name. Thanks, anyway! Zoeperkoe (talk) 04:46, 9 July 2010 (UTC)


My mistake. Already corrected. -- Zoeperkoe (talk) 22:23, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Khojaly–Gadabay culture?[edit]

I have noticed you have made edits to several articles related to the early cultures of Anatolia / Caucasus. Your imput here, in this article for deletion request, might be useful: [2]. Have you heard of such an archeological term being used anywhere? Scribblescribblescribble (talk) 20:40, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Nagar to Tell Brak[edit]

Hi Ploversegg, I wanted to move Nagar to Tell Brak (since that is, I am quite sure, the name by which the site is best known both in and outside the scientific community) but couldn't since that page already exists and I now have to make a formal rename request. But that does give me the opportunity to ask whether you, as one of the main contributors, would oppose such a renaming? --Zoeperkoe (talk) 16:35, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Works for me. Is there some kind of Bot now to chase down and change all the links? Anyway, sounds like a reasonable thing to do.Ploversegg (talk) 18:04, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Ok. If there is a bot, let me know; otherwise I'll just fix them one by one; there aren't that many anyway.--Zoeperkoe (talk) 18:41, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Assyrian history[edit]

I see your point. Unfortunately, (modern) Assyrians feel a (too) strong need to assert themselves on WP and at the moment it is not a can of worms I'm willing to dive into. But I agree that the pages on ancient Assyria are deteriorating fast. Maybe we should ask an admin to have a look at this and give an official warning (although they do not really seem to work; given the amount of warnings on this issue on Sinharib's talk page)?--Zoeperkoe (talk) 14:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Name of Armenia[edit]

Of course the IP is just ignoring the source, but doesn't the article Name of Armenia need fixing? Dougweller (talk) 07:14, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I looked at it. Given what I see on Talk:Name_of_Armenia I'm not sure I want to get in the middle of an Armenian revert war. :-) And the article does place the Naram-Sin stuff under Speculations. But, yeah, maybe I can tweak it a bit and ref the issue without getting flamed on. It's certainly easier than trying to fight the current run of Assyrian cultural penis envy edits going on in the ANE. Ploversegg (talk) 16:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree it's exhausting! Dougweller (talk) 11:22, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Al-Sinnabra [edit]

Information.svg An article that you have been involved in editing, Al-Sinnabra , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Sreifa (talk) 05:12, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Alishar Hüyük and Alişar[edit]

Hi Ploversegg, The article Alishar Hüyük, seems like a duplicate of Alişar (created in 2006). Happy editting. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 23:36, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Bold proposal to reorganize Template:Ancient Mesopotamia[edit]

I have made a proposal to reorganize Template:Ancient Mesopotamia. See here for the discussion; see here for the actual new draft. Your input is appreciated!--Zoeperkoe (talk) 18:48, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to workshops on Wikipedia editing[edit]

Dear Ploversegg,

We are a team of researchers at the University of Oxford and AU Sharjah, researching the experiences of editors of content about the Arab world on Wikipedia. We are interested in your experiences of editing Wikipedia and are organising two events that we think you would be an excellent contributor to.

First, we are hosting an online wiki focus group about contributing to Wikipedia in Arabic and to articles about the Middle East and North Africa. We are interested in what barriers you perceive to exist in Wikipedia, how articles can be made better and generally what can be done to expand and improve Arabic Wikipedia and Wikipedia articles about the Arab world. This discussion will take place on a MediaWiki hosted at our institution and be available in English and Arabic. We will allow users to create their own discussion pages in addition to our discussions.

Second, we are hosting face-to-face workshops in Cairo from 21st-22nd October 2012. If you are interested in this we should be able to pay travel and accommodation costs for up to twenty participants. This workshop will cover similar themes to the online discussion but will allow participants to meet one another and benefit from being together.

We will take care of the organization and planning and all you have to do is show up and be ready to discuss. But if you would like to help shape some of the discussion themes in advance, please let us know. We have booked time in the workshops for Wikipedian-led discussions.

More details can be found by expanding our “Frequently Asked Questions” below.

We would be delighted to welcome you to either (or both) event. Please let us know ( if you would like the opportunity to participate and we can send you more details.


Mark, Bernie, Ilhem, Ali, Ahmed, and Heather

Dr. Mark Graham, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford; Dr. Bernie Hogan, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford; Dr. Ilhem Allagui, Department of Mass Communication, American University of Sharjah; Dr. Ali Frihida, National Engineering School of Tunis; Heather Ford, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford; Ahmed Medhat, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford;

OIIOxford (talk) 10:24, 21 August 2012 (UTC), tidied 10:09, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)