Contents

Talk:Amenemhat IV

Amenemhat IV has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: December 7, 2014. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Amenemhat IV article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Royalty and Nobility This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as Low-importance). Ancient Egypt Mid‑importance 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.Ancient EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient EgyptTemplate:WikiProject Ancient EgyptAncient Egypt articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ancient Egypt to-do list: edit history watch purge Needed articles. We should have an article on every pyramid and every nome in Ancient Egypt. I'm sure the rest of us can think of other articles we should have. Cleanup. 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) Stub sorting Anyone? I consider this probably the most unimportant of tasks on Wikipedia, but if you believe it needs to be done . . . Data sorting. 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.

What Woman ruled Egypt around 3300 BC [="1500 years" before] ?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.143.68.244 (talk) 02:20, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the following sentence ..

Amenemhet IV may have been Moses.^{[citation needed]}

Markh 08:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense.mikey 03:39, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The prenomen is wrong. Sigh. So many of the names of Egyptian kings here at Wikipedia are either wrong, incomplete, or mistranslated.

Exactly what is the concern? I see that Maa has been mistransliterated Maat... but is there anything besides that wrong with it? Thanatosimii 03:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The king's prenomen is mAa-xrw-rA, not mAa-snw-rA as written here. Somebody has replaced the oar glyph (xrw = Kheru) in the cartouche with the arrowhead glyph (sn = Sen).

hmm... good catch. Thanatosimii 21:16, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Amenemhat IV/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wizardman (talk · contribs) 05:28, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll give reviewing this a shot. I don't believe I've reviewed an Ancient Egyptian article before, so should be interesting. Wizardman 05:28, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking forward to your review. Iry-Hor (talk) 10:58, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the issues I found:

• "ruling for over 9 years at the end" nine; write out single-digit numbers.

Y Done! Iry-Hor (talk) 08:42, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "and to the Land of Punt and maintained trade relation with " relations; also the two ands back to back make this sentence feel like a run-on; reword.

Y Done! Iry-Hor (talk) 08:42, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "and inaugurates the decline of the Middle Kingdom into the Second Intermediate Period." inaugurated

Y Done! Iry-Hor (talk) 08:42, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "The relation of Amenemhat IV to Amenemhat III is similarly uncertain, the " should be a semicolon

Y Done! Iry-Hor (talk) 08:42, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• " This is contested however and some egyptologists, among which Aidan Dodson and Kim Ryholt," I'd use 'such as' rather than among which, the latter doesn't sound right.

Y Done! Iry-Hor (talk) 08:42, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "The foundations of the temple, administrative buildings, granaries and residences were uncovered by an Egyptian archaeological expedition in early 2006. Amenemhat IV likely also built a temple in the northeastern Fayum at Qasr el-Sagha." would like to see this cited.

Y Citation added! Iry-Hor (talk) 08:42, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Going the other way, why the five citations for the sentence in the next paragraph? Seems like a simple enough paragraph.

Y Because the pedestal of Amenemhat IV in Karnak is an important piece of evidence regarding his coregency and thus has been discussed by scholars a number of times. The citations given include the most recent work on the subject, and the founding studies on the matter as well as a photography of the pedestal. Iry-Hor (talk) 08:42, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "Less probably, " less likely sounds a bit better.

Y Done! Iry-Hor (talk) 08:42, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• See if you can find someone to do a quick punctuation copyedit; some of the comma usage isn't very good. I gave some examples of this above.

I have asked native speakers to do this for me. Iry-Hor (talk) 13:29, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've run through the article, correcting punctuation and trimming some verbiage, and I think it's in pretty good shape now. A. Parrot (talk) 02:56, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll put the article on hold and will give it a second read-through once everything's addressed. Wizardman 01:34, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It reads a lot better after the copyedit, thanks for doing that. Since everything else has been addressed, I'll pass the article. Wizardman 05:09, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

and an inscription found in Semna at the Second Cataract is dated to his year 13, which probably also counts his coregency.

I deleted that sentence. I checked the Semna inscriptions and there is no year 13 for Amenemhat IV. I guess that might be an old - out of date - reading of one of the inscriptions, some of them are quite faded.. bw -- Udimu (talk) 16:22, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Udimu Wait are you sure? Because this is explicitely said in Baker's book. It says: "At present, the highest contemporary date we have for Amenemhet IV is a year 13 from an inscription found at Semna, at the Second Cataract". Unless you have a contradictory evidence that this is a mistake, the statement should be put back since it is referenced. Iry-Hor (talk) 19:09, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the publications (Dunham, Janssen: Second Cat. Forts and Reineke, Hintze: Felsinschriften) of the rock inscriptions of Semna and can't find any year 13 for Amenemhat IV. Does Baker cite his evidence? I can check that. best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 23:53, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Baker does give his references but the problem is he does not say which one is about the Semna inscriptions (there is just a list of references at the end of the article on Amenemhat IV). I will boil the possibilities down to 2 or 3 references and will check them. Iry-Hor (talk) 08:51, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I also checked Matzker, Ingo: Die letzten Könige der 12. Dynastie http://www.peterlang.com/download/datasheet/12069/datasheet_09348.pdf . He give a list of all monuments with the year dates. There is no year 13 for A. IV. Not sure where Baker got the information. bw -- Udimu (talk) 17:14, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]