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
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
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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egypt 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.EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject EgyptTemplate:WikiProject EgyptEgypt
I think it deserves its own page, and more importantly, that it be started from scratch with the Verbrugghe/Wickersham research to structure it, at least to get started. As I said, I've got online to access to the relevant section so can at least make a rudimentary outline of their own position. There are also basic questions that I see lay persons like myself have about transmission and historicity that I think the current section only makes more muddy that I think can be better explained and answered. Cobalt blur (talk) 16:50, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like the image commonly used for Manetho is in dispute now. Granted it likely doesn't depict him, but I don't think it warrants removal unless a agreement with the community is made. 129.89.234.100 (talk) 15:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It definitely does not depict him. The rationale for including it is that it purportedly represents the insignia of a priest of Serapis, though I don't even know whether that is true, and it's not clear whether Manetho was an actual priest of Serapis in any case. Moreover, when an image appears in the lead of a biographical article, readers will expect it to depict the subject of the article. I just don't see a reason to include it. A. Parrot (talk) 16:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with A. Parrot, if the image is at the top and made the thumbnail many readers skimming through the article will not read the caption and just assume it is a bust of Manetho, I know I did the first few times I was on this article. I am however, open to the possibility of moving the image to somewhere else in the article. PharaohCrab (talk) 14:02, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm partial to using the image, and hoped that the disclaimer in the caption would suffice to justify using it. I think Manetho the man and historical figure merits some token representation, whatever it is. I believe that evidence shows that the bust of the priest can be a plausible representation of an Egyptian religious elite of Manetho's time. As for moving it further down, I understand the argument in favor. I'm the editor who put it back on top so I'll abstain from any straw poll. Cobalt blur (talk) 16:10, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I replaced the existing "Contents" which was unsourced with a new brief synopsis with source/citations and breakdown by Volume/Dynasties/Periods for easy reference. I also removed the anachronistic painting depicting the arrival Ptolemy. I believe it does not belong in this article as it is, again, entirely anachronistic (painted 19th. century) and does not purport to depict Manetho or any representation of an Egyptian priest of this era. Cobalt blur (talk) 18:13, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Continuing work on "Manetho" and "Draft:Aegyptiaca"
I'm really trying to organize the "Manetho" article to keep the focus on Manetho the author and his body of work as it exists in fragments. I do anticipate the Aegyptiaca article in draft form being published soon, and so have streamlined the section in "Manetho" on that single work. There is more to expand in "Manetho", particularly on fragmentology, the classification of his fragments, testimony (attestation), sources of fragments other than the four most-discussed, and the German sources (Felix Jacoby notably) of Verbrugghe and Wickersham. Cobalt blur (talk) 04:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
