This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
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 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography 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.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi
It is normal to use abbreviations without explanation ONLY when they are either:
Commonly used, or
Have been already defined in previous text
In other words, "Blah Blah Rhubarb (BBR)", in the first use of BBR, and then one can use "BBR" after that - even then, it is advisable to redefine if there is a lot of text between first and second use ...Why? Because if that person is only interested in the information in one section, they should not have to read the whole article to find where the abbr. is defined.
One cannot simply start saying "BBR" in an article WITHOUT first defining the term, as no one would have a clue I meant "Blah Blah Rhubarb"
Here, we have "Pliny the Elder (N.H. 5.11)" - no one knows what N.H. 5.11 is.
Furthermore, there are no refs for the whole of that section - so there is NO WAY for anyone to find out what the hell that is.
I have had to search Google and Wikipedia to try and find out what this means, and after 20 minutes I am guessing it is meant to refer to Pliny's work, Natural_History_(Pliny)
Can someone confrim and amend please Chaosdruid (talk) 12:56, 19 March 2019 (UTC)Reply
.svg)
_01.svg){kind=small}
