Examine individual changes

'{{talkheader}} {{WPMILHIST |class=Start <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes |Ancient-Near-East-task-force=yes}} {{WikiProject Ancient Near East|class=c|importance=}} {{Vital article|topic=History|level=5|class=C}} == == I have two printed works that say 1479, but twice as many online references say 1469 (tho many are WP-derived), and there are a few websites that use both 1469 and 1479 on the same page(!). Which should it be? [[User:Stan Shebs|Stan]] 04:33, 5 May 2004 (UTC) :I have moved the page to '''Battle of Megiddo (15th century BCE)''', a. to reflect the uncertainty as to the precise dating of the event (though noting that by far the best accepted date amongst Egyptologists is currently 1457 BCE); b. to remove the BC and make it BCE "before Christian era" - far more acceptable overall [[User:Pjamescowie|Pjamescowie]] 18:08, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC) Should [[siege of Megiddo]] be merged into this? I don't think there is really enough information to warrant to separate articles, and they are part of the same event. [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] 20:32, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC) == Geographically inconsistent account == The article says: "To continue north, they had to pass the Mount Carmel ridge. Behind it lay the city and fortress of Megiddo, where the revolting forces had gathered" This doesn't make any sense Megiddo is south east to Mount Carmel. Is this because these locations have changed over the past 1500 years? Nevertheless the article points to specific coordinates, and those coordinates are completely against what the text says. I think this article is complete rubbish, and would be better deleted altogether. The only thing worth salvaging from this is some kind of proper reference to the historical texts it claims to be derived from. [[User:Whitehorses2501|Whitehorses2501]] ([[User talk:Whitehorses2501|talk]]) 10:50, 19 May 2020 (UTC) :{{re|Whitehorses2501}} - no, they haven't changed, the reference is to the ridge, and our article on [[Mount Carmel]] says: :The phrase "Mount Carmel" has been used in three distinct ways:[3] :To refer to the 39 km-long (24-mile long) mountain range, stretching as far in the southeast as Jenin. :To refer to the northwestern 21 km (13 mi) of the mountain range. "\:To refer to the headland at the northwestern end of the range. :It's correct, and your comments about it being complete rubbish are just wrong. Our articles are meant to be built on reliable sources, and those aren't the historical texts all the time, we rely upon academic interpretations. [[Eric H. Cline]] is an expert on this subject. But feel free to add anything else specific that you think is wrong. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 15:46, 19 May 2020 (UTC) :{{re|Doug Weller}} Apologies, I was mostly wrong. The main reason for my confusion was that the referenced article for [[Mount Carmel]] points to somewhere far away to the north-west, while the article says [[Tel Yokneam]] should be at the north end of the ridge, and [[Taanach]] at the south. If I understand it correctly it sounds like Thutmose III was crossing the ridge along the line of [[Highway 65 (Israel)]]. ::{{re|Whitehorses2501)) don't worry about it. If you want a quote from Cline I can give it to you. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 10:37, 20 May 2020 (UTC) == Unstubbed == I've done my duty. Finding this a stub, I researched what I had. I found the German Wikipedia version pretty complete. I merged that with what little this article started with, added bits from my sources. Others can take it from here. This also covers the Siege of Megiddo, what little there is. I don't think there will ever be enough for a separate article on that. I will redirect Siege of Megiddo to here. Chronologically, this is the first ancient battle article; only about 1500 more to go. --[[User:A D Monroe III|A D Monroe III]] 22:55, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC) You did an excellent job. But according to Hittite tablets, found in the last century, the battle might have actually have been a stalemate. The expansion of Egyptian territory might have come more from diplomacy than from battle. The accounts taken in this article are from the Egyptian side only. The truth is, the archaeological and historical evidence is too scant to determine if this was truly an Egyptian victory on the battle field, I think that should be mentioned. --[[ User: Diggerjohn111]] 17:52, 13 Apr 2007 (UTC) :Are there Hittitie accounts of this battle? Might you be confusing it with the [[Battle of Kadesh]]? [[User:PatGallacher|PatGallacher]] ([[User talk:PatGallacher|talk]]) 17:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC) == Egyptrivia == Dupuy's Evo says Egyptian scribes (under [[Thutmose III]]) were the first to do body counts after battles ended. --[[User_talk:Trekphiler|Trekphiler]] 23:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC) == Removed copyvio by Egyptos == I've reverted his edits as they were basically copyvios from http://touregypt.net/battleofmegiddo.htm and http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/megiddo.htm -- as are many of his edits on other articles.--[[User:Dougweller|Doug Weller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 20:56, 30 April 2008 (UTC) ==Accuracy problems== There appears to be some very dubious original research going on with this article. This is the first I have heard of this, that Judges chapter 4 is a reference to the Battle of Megiddo fought by Thutmose III, and having a quick look over this chapter I see nothing which would support this view, or any mention of Egyptians. Do we have clear Hittite references to this battle either? [[User:PatGallacher|PatGallacher]] ([[User talk:PatGallacher|talk]]) 11:56, 30 April 2009 (UTC) :Anything by Rktect anywhere should be deleted, he is/was notorious for original research here and elsewhere. I thought most of his stuff had been cleaned up but this may have been missed. I've cleaned the Judges/Sisera stuff out, it was fairly recent, now it needs improving. [[User:Dougweller|Dougweller]] ([[User talk:Dougweller|talk]]) 16:23, 30 April 2009 (UTC) ==Requested move== {{polltop}} '''No consensus''' for move. [[User:Parsecboy|Parsecboy]] ([[User talk:Parsecboy|talk]]) 00:33, 7 May 2009 (UTC) *I propose we move this article to "Battle of Megiddo" as this is clearly the best known battle fought there. This will mean moving the existing [[Battle of Megiddo]] article to "Battle of Megiddo (disambiguation)". [[User:PatGallacher|PatGallacher]] ([[User talk:PatGallacher|talk]]) 23:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC) *[[Battle of Megiddo (1918)]] is the most notable to many people here in Britain, which had a large army in that battle. [[User:Anthony Appleyard|Anthony Appleyard]] ([[User talk:Anthony Appleyard|talk]]) 06:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC) **That could be an anglocentric view. [[User:PatGallacher|PatGallacher]] ([[User talk:PatGallacher|talk]]) 17:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC) ***That would prove that a dab page should sit there. [[Special:Contributions/76.66.202.139|76.66.202.139]] ([[User talk:76.66.202.139|talk]]) 04:26, 2 May 2009 (UTC) *'''Comment''' amongst Christians, Jews and Muslims, wouldn't [[Battle of Megiddo (609 BC)]] be more familiar? [[Special:Contributions/76.66.202.139|76.66.202.139]] ([[User talk:76.66.202.139|talk]]) 04:28, 2 May 2009 (UTC) *The ''best known'' use of this name may well be [[Armageddon]] (forthcoming). Make the simple name a dab page to avoid errror. since we now have four plausible candidates. [[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis]] <small>[[User talk:Pmanderson|PMAnderson]]</small> 18:18, 4 May 2009 (UTC) {{pollbottom}} ==Date issues== Given the disputes which exist, I'm a bit cautious about any chronology claiming to give the exact year as far back as that. Even more surprising is the claim to an exact date. Is our knowledge of the ancient Egyptian calendar that precise that we can do this? Also, with any date prior to (I think) 1st March 101 BC you have to say if this is the proleptic Gregorian calendar or the proleptic Julian calendar. [[User:PatGallacher|PatGallacher]] ([[User talk:PatGallacher|talk]]) 15:04, 4 May 2009 (UTC) :Any date prior to the invention of the Gregorian calendar may be presumed Julian (unless it deals with the unreformed Roman calendar, meaningless here). Inserting ''Julian'' is probably harmless. [[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis]] <small>[[User talk:Pmanderson|PMAnderson]]</small> 17:49, 4 May 2009 (UTC) ::Can we presume that? I am not disputing that normally applies to dates from when the Julian calendar was normally in use, but what about before then? [[Proleptic Gregorian calendar]] says that this tends to be used for historic dates for cultures which did not use the Julian calendar. At this time there would be an 11-day gap between the Julian and Gregorian dates, which in some places might be significant in terms of hours of daylight, weather etc., and the Gregorian date corresponds to the calendar we now use. I don't think we can just let this stand without clarification from the relevant source. [[User:PatGallacher|PatGallacher]] ([[User talk:PatGallacher|talk]]) 19:07, 4 May 2009 (UTC) :::I don't believe that, at least about the Mediterranean. Switching Greek or Egyptian history from Gregorian to Julian (as dates must be for Augustus's time) to Gregorian again makes no sense. It may be true (I do not know) for Mayan or Chinese dates, but not here. [[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis]] <small>[[User talk:Pmanderson|PMAnderson]]</small> 20:53, 4 May 2009 (UTC) ::::That last comment strikes me as confused, and I am genuinely confused about what it means. Actually, during Augustus's time Julian and Gregorian dates would be identical, what we are dealing with here is dates well before his time. [[User:PatGallacher|PatGallacher]] ([[User talk:PatGallacher|talk]]) 23:57, 4 May 2009 (UTC) ::::::''Actually, during Augustus's time Julian and Gregorian dates would be identical,'' No; they are identical during the third century. The Gregorian calendar lost one day at 300 AD, and has lost 3 days each 400 years since to the present difference of 13. [[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis]] <small>[[User talk:Pmanderson|PMAnderson]]</small> 18:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC) The source gives the date of the battle as "Year 23, first month of the third season, on the twenty-first day, the day of the feast of the new moon, corresponding to the royal coronation". [[User:PatGallacher|PatGallacher]] ([[User talk:PatGallacher|talk]]) 17:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC) == A Useful Reference == Last night I saw the excellent PBS 3-hour series "Egypt's Golden Empire . New Kingdom"; it corresponds closely to what I read in the article. [[User:Kevin Langdon|Kevin Langdon]] ([[User talk:Kevin Langdon|talk]]) 19:29, 20 January 2014 (UTC) == A Useful Reference == Last night I saw the excellent PBS 3-hour series "Egypt's Golden Empire . New Kingdom"; it corresponds closely to what I read in the article. [[User:Kevin Langdon|Kevin Langdon]] ([[User talk:Kevin Langdon|talk]]) 19:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC) == External links modified == Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on [[Battle of Megiddo (15th century BC)]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=746657098 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes: *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050222115640/http://www.meritneith.de:80/thutmosis_militaer.htm to http://www.meritneith.de/thutmosis_militaer.htm When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}). {{sourcecheck|checked=false}} Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 18:50, 28 October 2016 (UTC) == A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion == The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: * [[commons:File:Model of Megiddo, 1457 BCE..jpg|Model of Megiddo, 1457 BCE..jpg]]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2018-08-17T07:51:54.968179 | Model of Megiddo, 1457 BCE..jpg --> Participate in the deletion discussion at the [[commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Model of Megiddo, 1457 BCE..jpg|nomination page]]. —[[User:Community Tech bot|Community Tech bot]] ([[User talk:Community Tech bot|talk]]) 07:52, 17 August 2018 (UTC) == hi == 5jk23r4. ~~~~'