Talk:Abuwtiyuw/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Malleus Fatuorum (talk · contribs) 02:02, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

References

• I'm a little concerned that this article relies on a single source, Reisner (1936). There are other somewhat more recent sources such as Leech's God had a Dog: Folklore of the Dog (1961). Lobban's Historical Dictionary of Ancient and Medieval Nubia (2004) gives some useful background on dog burials in Ancient Egypt that I think is missing from this article.

some more sources here.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:40, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Lead

• The lead is too short to adequately summarise the article.

Expanded.

• "Living in the 5th or 6th Dynasty (2504–2216 BC) .... Where does that year range come from? The linked articles would suggest a range of 2494–2181 BC.

And c.2280 is mentioned. Will alter.

• "The Egyptian dog Abuwtiyuw, was one of the earliest pets known by its name." All indications seem to be that Abuwtiyuw was a guard dog, not a pet.

Changed to "domestic animals".

Discovery

• "Neither the grave nor the mummy of the dog has survived." We have no idea whether they've survived or not; all we know is that they haven't yet been discovered.

Changed.

• *"... but the chapel is, like the dog grave, no longer verifiable." What does "verifiable" mean in this context? Not yet discovered?

I think you altered this yourself.

• "The stone with this inscription was apparently built as a spolium into a different grave ..." A spolium isn't into anything.

Changed to of.

• "This tablet is the only source for Abuwtiyuw and is today located under the inventory number JE 67573". Nothing can be located under inventory numbers.

I've asked Ameer son if he can try to locate a Cairo Museum page or something

• Reisner thought that Abuwtiyuw was not the pharaoh's dog, but belonged to one of his officials, who had gained the ruler's favour because of the dog. Why did he think that? Does he no longer think that, as the past tense implies?

• What have the last two sentences of this section got to do with the tablet's discovery?

Which sentences are those? All seems relevant to me, but article has been altered since you wrote this.

Funerary chapel inscription

• "The funeral of Abuwtiyuw is fairly elaborate for a dog, as normally only upper-class humans received this honour. What honour? The honour of a funeral or of an elaborate funeral? Why only "fairly elaborate"? Were there more elaborate funerals for other dogs?

• The image of the Tesem dog ought to be in the Appearance section, and left-aligned.

Merged appearance with background/left aligned.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

• I would have thought it significant and worth mentioning that the list of the pharaoh's gifts doesn't include any "meat bones, such as dogs delight in".

Pedigree Chum just in case he came back to life for one last doggy treat?

It was common to include food and drink with the mummies in human burial tombs, why not dogs? Malleus Fatuorum 17:43, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. "Akhenaten's Prime Cuts in Bull Blood" would be most essential as an offering for a canine funeral.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:05, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Etymology

• This one sentence section is really too small to stand alone and comes too late. It would be better merged with the missing Background section the article ought to open with.

I merged it before I even read this!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:07, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Are we certain Mr. Writer about the year of discovery? A source in google books inaccessible at the moment becuase of a link error "Boston Museum bulletin - Volumes 31-36 - Page 97" is dated to 1933, and another Boston Museum source which I'd also access but for the access error says 1935. Sorted now, 18 October 1935.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Good idea that green text. I've long been looking for a way to make my review comments stand out, might take some remembering though the tq|i=y reminds me too much of frickin maths and physics, shudders at the thought of an old maths teacher who looked like Martina Navalatarova would if she'd died after a month without eating and rigamortis had set in and a mummifcation which had gone horribly long. Eesh, enough for now, I'll see if Aymatth can find anything further.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:12, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

• Third-party comment That Stokes sources is very clearly self-published. Does it pass WP:SPS? I can't find the book in WorldCat. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:51, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

  The Stokes source only appears necessary for the fact that Reisner's initial work was in Samaria (1908-1910). Lester L. Grabbe's "Ahab Agonistes", p. 294, provides an alternate source for the fact, but IMO it might be best to end the sentence at "from 1908." That Reisner first led digs at Samaria doesn't really seem to bear on the rest of the article. Choess (talk) 23:07, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

  I've got doubts about that Stokes source as well. Malleus Fatuorum 23:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

That's OK, removed, was one of the least important sentences anyway, just trying to put a context around his expedition work.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:22, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

• A very impressive transformation over the past couple of days or so. I'm happy to list this article as a GA now. Malleus Fatuorum 22:09, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.