Talk:Amarna Period
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Citations within text
[edit]Untitled
[edit]There are citations and descriptions of other texts within the body of the text that probably should be given as footnotes. 86.185.138.10 (talk) 01:32, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Proposed merger with Introduction to The Amarna Period: Amarna for Amateurs
[edit]- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- The discussion became irrelevant when the other article was deleted. A. Parrot (talk) 00:25, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
The recently created page Introduction to The Amarna Period: Amarna for Amateurs should be merged with this page as the current status of that page appears to violate WP:NOTGUIDE. Everymorning talk to me 21:49, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
- Support I'd prefer it were deleted as there are few in-line citations but I understand some oppose outright deletion. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:04, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
- Delete or merge. I pretty much agree with Chris Troutman. It irks me when people create this sort of pointlessly redundant article. "Introduction to The Amarna Period: Amarna for Amateurs" is not an intuitive title and therefore not a good candidate for a redirect, but once something's created it's rarely politically possible to delete. A. Parrot (talk) 22:22, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
- Well, User:NawlinWiki just deleted it, so I guess it is possible some of the time. I suppose we close the discussion? A. Parrot (talk) 22:23, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
decapitate?
[edit]It's "Amarna Period" in the title but "Amarna period" throughout the article. —Tamfang (talk) 20:50, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
so what? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8805:2305:F400:F899:EA1F:995:CD6E (talk) 15:28, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia also has an entry titled "The Armana Era"
[edit]See https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Amarna_Era. The subject seems to be the same 82.15.39.58 (talk) 17:50, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
Confusing
[edit]" It was believed that Smenkhkare was a male guise of Nefertiti. However, it is accepted that Smenkhkare was a male."
They can't both be correct. 109.144.209.159 (talk) 01:02, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- Powerful Egyptians were presumed male when the names and depictions are gender-ambiguous. There are people accepted by scholars as male when it's not clear. They're really accepted, but it's really not clear. The copy could use some work I guess.
- Temerarius (talk) 02:14, 1 October 2024 (UTC)