Talk:The Contendings of Horus and Seth: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 14:28, 2 November 2022

Ancient Egypt: Egyptian religion Start‑class 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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by Egyptian religion work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

WikiProject Ancient Egypt to-do list:

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.

Rewrite

The writer is obviously familiar with the specialist literature on the text, but is also obviously unable to write English properly. Perhaps the writer should confine him/herself to the language he/she finds easiest, viz. the native language. Best wishes. Anthony Alcock. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pamour (talk • contribs) 20:17, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 The writer is obviously familiar with the specialist literature on the text, but is also obviously unable to write English properly. Perhaps the writer should confine him/herself to the language he/she finds easiest, viz. the native language. Best wishes. Anthony Alcock.  <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Pamour|Pamour]] ([[User talk:Pamour|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pamour|contribs]]) 20:17, 4 April 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
-== Credibility of myth ==
-I am not questioning its existence far from it we can all see it was written long ago but how credible is it?
-The storyline has no ultimate meaning or moral as a myth should do. The storyline is opened up with the murder of a God but where is the lesson learned and retribution from it? To walk away scot free with two ladies at your side, half of the land and anointed chief protector?
-When condensed and put in to context it all actually seems rather ridiculous and pointless. It calls in to question whether this is the original storyline: would the people of that time who are consistently known for anal organisation and structure write such a loose sloppy myth? what good did or does it bring by teaching this without any form of moral in fact the opposite if anything?
-Anybody could have written this at almost anytime in our history especially if they had a position of political or religious power. It needs to be questioned. How sure are we and how sure can we be this is the original plot?
-From a logical, sceptical and scientific point of view indeed just common sense alone if screams fallacy and fraud. It is a shame we have such an incomplete and almost silly storyline from one of the only times in history where we as humanity generally got everything right. [[Special:Contributions/213.246.133.195|213.246.133.195]] ([[User talk:213.246.133.195|talk]]) 13:11, 2 November 2022 (UTC)