User talk:Iry-Hor

WikiCup 2018 November newsletter

The WikiCup is over for another year! Our Champion this year is Courcelles (submissions), who over the course of the competition has amassed 147 GAs, 111 GARs, 9 DYKs, 4 FLs and 1 ITN. Our finalists were as follows:

1. Courcelles (submissions)
2. Kosack (submissions)
3. Kees08 (submissions)
4. SounderBruce (submissions)
5. Cas Liber (submissions)
6. Nova Crystallis (submissions)
7. Iazyges (submissions)
8. Ceranthor (submissions)

All those who reached the final win awards, and awards will also be going to the following participants:

• Cas Liber (submissions) wins the FA prize, for three featured articles in round 2.
• Courcelles (submissions) wins the GA prize, for 92 good articles in round 3.
• Kosack (submissions) wins the FL prize, for five featured lists overall.
• Cartoon network freak (submissions) wins the topic prize, for 30 articles in good topics overall.
• Usernameunique (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 24 did you know articles in round 3.
• Zanhe (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 17 in the news articles overall.
• Aoba47 (submissions) wins the GAR prize, for 43 good article reviews in round 1.

Awards will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved much this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2019 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email) and Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email).

WikiCup 2019 March newsletter

And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2. With 56 contestants qualifying, each group in Round 2 contains seven contestants, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for Round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

• L293D, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with ten good articles on submarines for a total of 357 points.
• Adam Cuerden, a WikiCup veteran, came next with 274 points, mostly from eight featured pictures, restorations of artwork.
• MPJ-DK, a wrestling enthusiast, was in third place with 263 points, garnered from a featured list, five good articles, two DYKs and four GARs.
• Usernameunique came next at 243, with a featured article and a good article, both on ancient helmets.
• Squeamish Ossifrage was in joint fifth place with 224 points, mostly garnered from bringing the 1937 Fox vault fire to featured article status.
• Ed! was also on 224, with an amazing number of good article reviews (56 actually).

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews on 143 good articles, one hundred more than the number of good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Well done all!

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk).

Request for comment

Hello, Iry-Hor! I am not sure if we have formally met, but I am Unlimitedlead. I am currently working on Early life of Cleopatra alongside PericlesofAthens, with the end goal of getting it to FA status. As you are one of the leading experts on Ancient Egypt on this site, may I request some quick feedback about the current state of the article and what I can do to improve it? Thank you kindly, Unlimitedlead (talk) 12:50, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Dear Unlimitedlead I think you are overestimating my expertise! From what I can see the article is very well cited, reads very well (I am quite fond of your footnotes) and seems quite complete. On this latter point I cannot be completely sure for I guess it must be very difficult to cover all sources on such a subject and I don't even know which authors are authoritative on this late period. That would be my only question if I were to comment it at FAC: how do you know the subject is covered in full and how were the sources chosen? Now for some minor technical aspects:

• At FAC it is advised to order references in ascending fashion, for example in the sentence "[...]wrote Greek medical works which may have been inspired by the physicians at her father's royal court.[35][34]" the references should be inverted and put as"[34][35]", unordered refs appears in many other places. Personally I find this requirement on the order a bit annoying because you might have good reasons for putting [35] before [34] (for example one source is more precise on the point you a referring to, may be a primary source while the other is secondary etc.) but this will probably come up in the comments if you don't order them.
• All images have alt text, I found no duplinks, you used US English throughout consistently and the format of the refs is perfect.
• On "[...] such as Sobekneferu, Hatshepsut, and Nefertiti.[36]" is the source only listing these ? If so keep the list as it is. If not, why not include Twosret in addition ? I guess Merneith and Neithhotep are too ancient to have been known to Cleopatra.
• I think Manetho is primarily referred to as a priest or as a "priest-historian" rather than just "historian". Perhaps you could add priest to his epithets ?
• In the "See also" what is the logic behind the the order of the links? Perhaps a chronological ordering would make sense for example: Reign of Cleopatra VII, Death of Cleopatra, Amanirenas, List of cultural depictions of Cleopatra, Cleopatra race controversy. I propose this because a reader would probably want to go to her reign after her early life since the article stops at the reign's beginning. Then the Death of Cleopatra makes sense in this logic to provide here entire rest of life in two links, while Amanirenas would seem good just after, being a contemporary. To me however List of cultural depictions of Cleopatra and Cleopatra race controversy should come after all of these for they are articles on "modern" subjects and of modern concern.Iry-Hor (talk) 08:15, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback; it was most helpful to gain an outside perspective on the article before taking it to FAC. And do not feel the need to humble yourself: undeniably the articles about Ancient Egypt on this site would be in a horrific state without you! Take care, Unlimitedlead (talk) 12:58, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

On Ahmose I

Dear Aza24 how is Ahmose I coming ? I will have time to edit wikipedia starting next week so I was thinking about editing Ahmose I and Merenre I Nemtyemsaf. Was Ahmose I set up at FAR at some point or not yet ?Iry-Hor (talk) 07:40, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

I wanted to take a moment to express my sincere appreciation for all the tireless work you have done on Wikipedia over the years. Your contributions have been invaluable, and I cannot thank you enough for the significant impact you have made on the platform. In particular, I wanted to extend my gratitude for your contributions to the personal history of Ancient Egypt. Your research and writing have been an invaluable resource for my own project, and without your efforts, I would not have been able to make as much progress as I have. Your dedication and expertise are truly remarkable, and I am in awe of the amount of time and effort you have put into making Wikipedia a more informative and reliable source of information. Your work has undoubtedly helped countless individuals around the world learn and understand more about the fascinating history of Ancient Egypt. Thank you again for all that you do. Your contributions are deeply appreciated, and I wish you all the best in your future endeavours. Trabesinger Niklaus 21:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC)