Hello, I was wondering if you could suggest me a book or a paper about the MK nomarchs of the Hare (Hermopolite) nome, in other words the bunch of Djehutynakhts. Newberry's works on the necropolis are valuable but very likely outdated. In particular, I'm trying to find which Djehutynakht (at least 5 are known) is the one whose funerary equipment is exhibited in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, coming from Bersha tomb 10a. I tried to sketch a sort of genealogic tree but my results are inconclusive... --Khruner (talk) 09:44, 14 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the best summary is still in Harco Willems, Chests of Life (I have the book here, can make copies and send it as e-mail attachment). Harco Willems: The Nomarchs of the Hare Nome and the Early Middle Kingdom History, In: Jaarbericht ex Oriente Lux 28 (1983-84) is a full study on the evidence for the 11th Dynasty, but the results are in Chests of Life, that appeared later (i have a photocopy here). Harco published also Dayr Al-Barsha Volume I. the Rock Tombs of Djehutinakht (No. 17k74/1), Khnumnakht (No. 17k74/2), and Iha (No. 17k74/3), but I do not have it here. His final work is Historical and Archaeological Aspects of Egyptian Funerary Culture with some further comments. I guess if you can hold of copies of the last book and Chest of Life, that should be enough. A genealogy of the whole family appears in the book you cited, on page 191. best wishes ----

I've just checked, my university library has both Chests of Life and Historical and Archaeological Aspects... etc. but I have to wait until August ends. Meanwhile, I'll try to rework the genealogic tree just to see the differences with a professional reconstruction in September. Thanks for your suggestions! Khruner (talk) 12:44, 14 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. I've determined the Djehutynakht and written the article. Besides, I'd like if you would participate in this discussion, expecially sharing your opinion about Padibast's titles. Khruner (talk) 18:34, 15 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

sorry, for the late reply. I was on holidays. I will have a look at Djehutynakht. I wrote an article on Padibast. bw -- Udimu (talk) 12:23, 29 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Udimu, so can you confirm my impression (given by this pic) that Padibast probably wasn't a vizier at all? In that case I will correct this statement in the related articles. And how about the title of Overseer of Upper Egypt which is attributed to him in certain sources? I don't know how this title is written so I cannot say... Khruner (talk) 16:40, 29 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

many thanks for the link to the photo. Yes, there is visible also the title Overseer of Upper Egypt. I added the title to the article. I remember the press reports stating that he was vizier too, but can't find the title in any of the more serious reports, so I think that was a mistake. In the article, I just quoted the blog of the expedition that found that tomb. I think they are the most reliable source for the moment. best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 16:49, 29 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading!^^ Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 20:46, 16 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've long time thought about the ominous name Bedjau of ramesside king lists.

There is an ominous ruler named "Bird", right? It is thought by Beckerath, Schneider, Helck and Wilkinson, that this dude ruled either at the very end of the first dynasty, or at the midst of the second dynasty. The problem is the bird-depiction.

What do you say if I tell you that the reading of this bird might be "Bedja(u)"? There is indeed a bedjau-goose depicted during the reign of king Djer and Wadj. The bird is shown to be a special grave good for the deceased king. bedjau means something like "to proceed" or "guidance" (according to Morenz). My theory includes that Hor-Bedjau, Hor-Sneferka and Hor-Sekhet once ruled between Qa'a and Hotepsekhemwy as some kinda intermediate dynasty. But they were later excluded from official king lists, because their dynasty caused struggles amongst Egypt.

I also observed, that the throne name (niswt-bity nebty) is always exact the same as the serekh name from king Qa'a up to king Sekhemkhet. Isn't that interesting? That's why I do not believe into this nonsense about "misreading" and I also don't believe in Weneg being identical with Raneb. Raneb already HAD a throne- and nisut-bity name, and always was Raneb. I'll create a table with hieroglyphs to demonstrate what I mean.

But back to Bedjau. Again, I think that this odd name originally meant "Bird", not Hotepsekhemwy. Because: look at the Sakkara King List and the Royal Canon of Turin. Here Hotepsekhemwy is named Netjer-Bau. How is that possible??? Two completely different birthnames for one pharaoh? As if! Where the hay did the get the hieroglyphs for "Netjer-Bau" from????

Here my theory strikes: Bedjau = Hor-Bedjau; Netjer-Bau = Hor-Hetepsekhemwy. Their personalities just merged together because of the ramesside censoring.

As for me, it's especially the case of Hetepsekhemwy that bothers me. Why? Well, in contrast to Khasekhemwy we have no name change here! ;o) Hotepsekhemwy was always "Hotepsekhemwy". Khasekhemwy however, changed from "Kha-sekhem" to "Kha-sechemwy". Now to my prize winning question: why did Hotepsekhemwy NOT change his name??? Like, from "Hetepsekhem" into "Hetepsekhemwy"??? There is no "Hetepsechem"!

My second cardinal argument is the fact, that ramesside king lists allegedly use TWO DIFFERENT cartouche names for ONE AND THE SAME ruler! C'mon, do you really believe that? Have a look: at Giza and Abydos it's Bedjau, but at Sakkara and in the Turin Canon it's Netjer-Bau! Sorry, buddy, that this is definitively too phat for me. Such phat differences can't be explained by simple "misreading" - of what anyway??? Indeed, NO f*cking title, name or word of Hetepsekhemwy's lifetime could be used to build any of these names!

Not as long as: "Bedjau" was a different ruler, but his name merged with that of Hetepsekhemwy - such a case is proposed for Nynetjer, who is named "Ba-netjer" in all king lists, despite NO single title, name or word at Nynetjer's time uses the Ba-sign (neither the bird nor the ram).

Well, Wolfgang Helck points to several objects with the Ka-house of Heteps.. Inside this Ka-house the name Netjer-Ach or Ach-Netjer can be found. Helck claims, that this was the god Netjer-Achti. Nonsense in my opinion. At first, since when did the early Egyptians put the name of a god inside a ka-house??? There is no comparing case proven to hold this theory! Indeed, NO Egyptian ruler of the earliest dynasties mentions a deity inside their ka-house. The only thing you can find in a ka-house is a serekh-less Horus name and the phrase Za-Ha-Neb or Ha-Za-Neb inside. But a deity? Why should it, anyway? A ka-house was am offering chapel denoted to the king, not a temple denoted to a god.

I believe that Ach-Netjer was in fact the birth name of Heteps., but the Ach-bird was later erroneously read as a Ba- and Bau'-bird. This would explain as where the ramesside name Netjer-Bau comes from.

Maybe a look here helps to understand what I mean. The table is meant to show how I would divide the Early and Old Kingdom today. As you can see, my dividing concentrates on how certain groups of rulers used and designed their names and titles. What do you think? Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 18:50, 26 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

write an article in a journal! For the ka-chapel: be careful, that might be more a problem how words gets translated into a modern language and might not relate to the hieroglypjs. Chapel + privatename, gets the modern translation of ka-chapel of XX, chapel + God's name gets the modern translation: chapel of God YY. -- Udimu (talk) 10:09, 27 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lol, I'd really like to write an article in a journal.^^ But find the correct contacts... -.-" About the Ka-hose: mmmhh, ok, that has a good point. It simply confuses me that king Hotepsekhemwy's and Achty's name are put together in one and the same chapel. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 10:16, 27 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there. I have turned the family tree into a tidy list with some short infos for certain family members. What do you think? Is it better that the old block? Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 22:24, 12 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

yes, it looks much more clearer! -- Udimu (talk) 22:36, 12 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, do you have some sources regarding the chief psysician, dentist and admiral Psamtikseneb? The article is quite inconsistent, it seems to have been written gathering everything possible related to any person named Psamtikseneb, and I believe that most of the actual sources does not refer to the person in question. Khruner (talk) 16:38, 27 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have the book: Pressl, Beamte und Soldaten. That is on the officials of the 26th Dynasty. The author only assigns two monuments to Psamtikseneb: the statue Vatican no. 166 and the tomb at Heliopolis. I think the other sources must belong to different people. Especially the relief shown, certainly does not belong to him. Such an important person is not shown as harpist! I will go over the article, but it would be good if you do the same again, in case you have some of the articles or books cited. best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 17:24, 27 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well done, I fixed something and added another ref about him being also an admiral. And also well done in finding the Vatican statue picture, even considering his bizzarre Italian name Psammeticosenets. How did you find it? Also in the caption of the picture a time range is providen, 570-520 BCE, roughly the reign of Amasis. Did you find something confirming that age? Khruner (talk) 21:24, 27 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

perfect! Pressl does not give a translation of the titles, so I missed the admiral, but finally found it in her list. -- Udimu (talk) 22:09, 27 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Udimu! A happy new year and all good things to you and to your family and friends! May your Ka shine, your Ba thrive and your Ach be enlighted all year long! Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 15:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have a Happy New Year too. Thanks! -- Udimu (talk) 06:57, 3 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If I remember correctly, it was you who wrote the article "Seheneser" in German Wikipedia. Did you know that this lady is in fact known under the name "Sehefener"? I have borrowed a marvellous book by Miroslav Bárta, in which he describes and even translates her name and gives precious information about her. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 10:53, 7 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

i am looking forward to read that, but wonder what type of information Barta has, as the stela only records her name and title. -- Udimu (talk) 11:28, 7 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, for example, he says that her stela was possibly one of the earliest examples to show hieroglyphic numbers counting the amount of each offering good. He also shortly describes how intersting it was that the creator of her stela paid attention to the way of sorting the offering list around her and how vast it was. this lady must have been of real importance, cuz normally the content of private stelae was kept rather short and inside the apparition window only. At least at that early time. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 15:40, 7 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done: Sehefener. ;o) Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 17:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

oh, okay, very good, but you do not explain the reading of the name. The hieroglyhs in the very moment support the reading "Seheneser". best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 17:23, 7 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

oh, okay. no problem, I just followed Barta, the alternative reading comes from quibell. Barta reads "Sehefener" (which suprises me :D I'd rather read Sehenes-iner). Too bad that these two guys are the only giving any reading of the name... -.-" it's a tie! Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 17:27, 7 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

the problem: in the moment the hieros support "Seheneser", Barta must have a different interpretation of the signs. best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 17:39, 7 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

aah! now the bell rings!^^ I'll look again. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 17:42, 7 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wanna look again? ;o) I think I found quite a solution. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 11:50, 8 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

yes, okay, fine. But i am getting comfused. I thought Sehefener was the reading proposed by Barta. Now he did not??? -- Udimu (talk) 16:03, 8 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ok, how is it now? is it more clear now? regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 16:36, 8 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

i think there is still a litte bit to do:

1. The book from Barta is indeed an article by Hartwig Altenmǜller in a volume edited by Barta.

2. Miroslav Bárta (Hartwig Altenmǜller) ... give the transription Sḥnr. I can't find a transcription, on page 31

3. Miroslav Bárta (Hartwig Altenmǜller) to a datation at the time between the end of 2nd dynasty and the transition time of 2nd to 3rd dynasty.

On the page you cite, he just says 2nd Dynasty!

best wishes-- Udimu (talk) 17:19, 8 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

thanx for your support! looks much better now. regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 18:43, 8 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What do you think? Is the article ok? Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 22:22, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

not bad, i just do not know anything about that stela :-) -- Udimu (talk) 15:44, 11 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Udimu, I was have seen recently that you have produced a large number of new articles on Ancient Egyptian nobles, princes, queens and princesses etc. I was wondering if, in that same vein, you would be interested in writing an article on Kaemtjenent, a 5th Dynasty prince(?) whose name shows up a lot when dealing with Menkauhor Kaiu and Djedkare Isesi. Iry-Hor (talk) 14:17, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

yeap, will do that! best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 14:31, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Great!! You can read a few things about him in the article here Djedkare_Isesi#Sons and there Isesi-ankh#Filiation and in the attached references. Kaemtjenent is also mentioned in the articles on Meresankh IV and Menkauhor_Kaiu#Descendants and possibly elsewhere in articles on the late 5th Dynasty. Let me know if I can help you further. Iry-Hor (talk) 15:01, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will read that, but must admit, that I am not very firm on Old Kindgom royal families and do not have much literature here (there is plenty of it!), so I might be not of big help without a relevant book at my hand. best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 15:11, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I can provide you with plenty of references if needed. I have put many of them on a google drive so if you give me an email address I can certainly share these documents with you. Iry-Hor (talk) 15:37, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

for the moment: I finished an article of Kaemtjenent. Strudwick, Administration does not think he was king's son. You might check Dodson on this to see whether there are other opinions around. Would be nice to have some relevant other sources!! best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 15:43, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks that's great, yes indeed some Egyptologists think he was a king's son but I should clarify in Djedkare's article that this is indeed debated. Baud and Schmitz seem to doubt the filiation as well, as can be seen in these books on the royal families of the Old Kingdom:

Baud, Michel (1999a). Famille Royale et pouvoir sous l'Ancien Empire égyptien. Tome 1 (PDF). Bibliothèque d'étude 126/1 (in French). Cairo: Institut français d'archéologie orientale. ISBN 978-2-7247-0250-7. ((cite book)): Invalid |ref=harv (help)

Baud, Michel (1999b). Famille Royale et pouvoir sous l'Ancien Empire égyptien. Tome 2 (PDF). Bibliothèque d'étude 126/2 (in French). Cairo: Institut français d'archéologie orientale. ISBN 978-2-7247-0250-7. ((cite book)): Invalid |ref=harv (help)

many thanks, yes, these volumes are the most essential ones for the royal family in the Old Kingdom. Thanks for the other volumes. After some initial problems, I manage to download some of them (Oxford, History, I have here as real book). -- Udimu (talk) 16:32, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PS.: thanks for the Falafel, i am hungry right now, wish i could eat it;-)

Yes indeed, the 2nd volume of Baud discusses Kaemtjenent on p. 591. Iry-Hor (talk) 16:49, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For being so fast at creating the page on Kaemtjenent, please accept this falafel! Iry-Hor (talk) 16:27, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, so while reading your article on Minnefer I remembered reading that Altenmuller seems to doubt he was a vizier. Indeed he writes "Other viziers during the long reign of the king were Kay and Pehenuka, [...] and perhaps Minufer." Do you have any idea why he says perhaps? Did Minufer really bore the titles of a vizier? Iry-Hor (talk) 16:49, 24 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

this is weird. Minnefer is depicted in the funerary temple of Nyuserre. What more evidence does he wants? I will check other references. best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 17:10, 24 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is an ongoing discussion here about a category (currently up for deletion) that could be regrouping princes/princesses/viziers etc. alived during the reign of any given pharaoh. Since you edit many of these articles I thought you might be interested in giving your opinion. Iry-Hor (talk) 12:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. Last year you suggested to me some works about the nomarchs of the Hare nome (Djehutynakht I, II etc). I'm wondering if you could suggest to me any work about the nomarchs buried at Qaw el-Kebir (Wahka I, II etc) and the 12th Dynasty nomarchs buried at Asyut (Djefaihapi I, II etc). I have already checked Grajetzki's Middle Kingdom but he gives little information about these families.Khruner (talk) 17:59, 9 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

there is very little known about the families of the nomarchs at Qaw el--Kebir. The tombs are badly destroyed and most of these normarchs are just names. Their order is disputed, so not much is written about them, here and there is a appears a reference in footnotes. However, here is a recent article: http://www.lasapienzatojericho.it/SitoRivista/Publicazioni/V&MO%20XV/V&MO_XV_Melandri.pdf dating the last tomb of Wahka II under Senusret III. Do you have the recent catalogues of the Metropolitan on the Middle Kingdom and from Lille? There are also some useful information on dating of the latter statue. Grajetzki wrote an article too in the UCLA Encyclopedia (http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5xm3202h#page-14) that gives further references. He also wrote a short article on the nomarchs (cited there); Steindorf's and Steckewehs' (Die Fürstengräber von Qâw) publication of the tombs is still fundamental (do you read German? Petrie, Antaeopolis: The tombs of Qau. also excavated there, but his conclusions are out of date. best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 18:50, 9 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks a lot for all those references, the first one is even in Italian, easier than ever. I was unaware of those huge tombs at Qaw el-Kebir until few days ago when I visited the Museo Egizio for the first time and stumbled across all those beautiful monuments of several Wahka. De.wiki has articles for two of them but, lacking any mentions of familiar relationships, it is indeed impossible to reconstruct a sort of family tree as Egyptologists managed to do with the Djehutynakht and Khnumhotep. Unfortunately I can't get a full preview of Petrie's Antaeopolis and I can't find at all a copy of Die Fürstengräber von Qâw (furthermore, I can't read German). But I will start by reading your other suggestions. Khruner (talk) 19:23, 9 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

the De.wiki are both written by me :-) the problem is really that there are many statues and reliefs from old excavations. These old excavations often did not record where objects were found; furthermore many people at Qaw have the same name Wahka and Ibu, making is not exactly easy to assign one particular object to a specific date and tomb. A lot of research is based on Steckeweh, but it seems he got some information wrong. -- Udimu (talk) 09:04, 10 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see. Too bad, I like Middle Kingdom nomarchs and to try to illustrate such articles, but at the current state of knowledge, it seems that these Wahka will be left without pictures. The only unquestionable photos that could be applied to these articles are these of their tombs at Qaw, but none is available. Nothing to do but waiting for the next excavation, I guess. Khruner (talk) 12:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the Petrie Publication must be out of copyright, so if you can find a copy (I saw it online, but can't find it anymore), you could have some pictures. Why not working on the nomarchs of Asyut? Do you have access to the SAK volumes? In the last 10 years, there appeared in these volumes quite a number of excavation reports on tombs of newly discovered normarchs. Meir is also an option! bw -- Udimu (talk) 13:43, 10 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I can't find Petrie's work anywhere, and it isn't fully readable on Google Books. However, I have access to all the SAK volumes from my university's library so thinking about the nomarchs at Asyut (the Djefaihapi) could be a good idea. For some unnown reason I've never considered the nomarchs at Meir (the Ukhhotep, I guess). Thanks for your suggestion. Khruner (talk) 14:18, 10 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Udimu, I have seen that in all your recent articles on the viziers, you write that the vizier was the most important member of the royal court, second only to the king. I too believed this was true until recently some doubts arose while reading sources about the evolution of the Egyptian administration during the 5th dynasty. Consider this: from the reign of Neferirkare Kakai onwards, viziers were no longer of royal blood, instead they were chosen amongst the nobles and were some time married to a daughter of the pharaoh. This contrasts with e.g. the 4th Dynasty, when viziers were always princes and the likes. This raises the question of the status of princes during the 5th Dynasty and heir apparents in particular. It seems to me that it is thus not obvious that the vizier would be higher ranked than a pharaoh's son or an heir apparent. Even though princes may not have held any real function (that is they spent their lives at court), it seems highly probable that they would have been perceived as higher ranked, more distinguished than a vizier. What do you think? Do you have sources pertaining to the matter? Iry-Hor (talk) 08:40, 13 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Iry-Hor, that is an interesting question. I choose that phrase only second to the king as introduction, mainly for people not aware of ancient Egyptian administration, perhaps also to avoid from the very beginning any discussion about deletion, to meet notability standard. I agree that in terms of real status, the king's sons were most likely more important, but without titles, they might not have had real power (well, who knows?). I do not remember any 5th Dynasty king's son with an impressive tomb. However, I must admit, doing all the viziers, I was quite surprised about the small tombs, at least for some of them, without the vizier title they did not come over as very important. Perhaps I better rephrase these articles to something like head of the administration. best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 09:08, 13 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't think head of the administration is appropriate either as it strongly depends on the period: for example, from Djedkare onwards, viziers were head of the scribal administration (which they weren't before), while the head of the legal administration was a man of lower status. Also from Djedkare and espeically Teti onwards, it seems (although it is debated) that princes could once again hold some titles normally associated with viziers, such as Greatest one of five in the house of Thoth and the like. It seems best then to qualify viziers as "one of the most important member of the royal court", "the highest nonroyal position in the administration" (this one is from Redford's encyclopedia but in a New Kingdom contest). Iry-Hor (talk) 08:24, 14 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, could you help me in identifying this ancient Egyptian town, "Srdt"? I have never heard of it, maybe it has a more common Greek/Arabic name. I've found this town associated with the goddess Nebethetepet. Here's the name written in hieroglyphs:

Khruner (talk) 16:03, 29 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I can not find that place in any lists of place names i have. Do you have more information? On which object does the place appear? Do you habve literature? Perhaps misspelling for another place name? -- Udimu (talk) 17:08, 29 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I know very little more. The name came from a royal woman's title, ḥmt-nṯr n Nḫbt-ḥtpt n Srdt. My source is Troy, 1986, Pattern of Queenship..., p. 187 (B2/11). Apparently the title refers to a royal lady of the 21st Dynasty but unfortunately I haven't the full book where the reference - or at least the name of the lady - is presumably given. In the few sources I was able to get about the goddess Nebethetepet, only Heliopolis is mentioned, so maybe Srdt was a small town near to it..? Khruner (talk) 18:09, 29 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

i do not have access in the moment to a library, but you might check - if you can - Leitz, Lexikon der aegyptischen Goetter, IV, 110. Perhaps they list this epitheton of Nḫbt-ḥtpt. Otherwise, i am clueless. I have a book on Heliopolis, but the place is not mentioned there :-( -- Udimu (talk) 18:31, 29 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion. I've found in the local OPAC both Troy and Leitz, so in the next days I hope to unravel this mystery. Khruner (talk) 21:48, 29 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I can not find the epithet in Leitz, but I got more infos from Troy. The title came from a wooden tablet found at Deir el-Bahari and belonged to Neskhons, a daughter of HPA Smendes II of the 21st Dynasty. The funny thing is that this tablet was uploaded on Commons by me over 2 years ago, you can see it in Neskhons' article. Khruner (talk) 19:44, 7 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

the stela is today in the Petrie Museum UC14226. There is a catalogue of the museum. Harry Milne Stewart, Egyptian stelae, reliefs and paintings from the Petrie collection: part 3. The Late Period. no.1, pl.47. There might be more information. I can check that in the next days too. bw -- Udimu (talk) 20:26, 7 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I can't find this work in the local OPAC at all, so thanks in advance! Khruner (talk) 11:08, 8 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

it should be in my university, it will just take some further days. I will have a look, hopefully the author comments on that! bw -- Udimu (talk) 11:10, 8 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

i searched for the stela on the internet. Most translations refer to the place as serudet or serwedet. It might be worth looking here: Vandier: Iousâas et (Hathor)-Nébet-Hétépet. RdÉ 18:67–142. bw- Udimu (talk) 11:19, 8 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see, maybe I will be able to get it tomorrow evening..! Khruner (talk) 13:12, 8 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

i checked. The place is only twice attested, always as epitheton of Nḫbt-ḥtpt, in both cases on objects of Neskhons (the stela and in her Book of the Dead). Nobody knows what and where this place is... -- Udimu (talk) 18:31, 9 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see, how strange that nobody has suggested any location for that toponym. I'll try to find something specific about the goddess, maybe some suggestion can come out. Thanks again for the kind help! Khruner (talk) 19:26, 9 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I'd like if you can give your opinion in this talk. Best wishes, Khruner (talk) 17:26, 18 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:Dr. Blofeld has created Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:39, 21 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi! Maybe you'd like to take a look at my discussion page? Someone pretending to be professor Francesco Tiradritti claims that he "never wrote anything about king Sneferka". The book "Kemet: Alle sorgenti di tempo" and Tiradritti's webpage tell different. What do you think? Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 12:08, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for help! Could you change the entries in the German article for me? I'm blocked there, as you know. Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 12:31, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

will do that. Sei etwas netter zu den Leuten;-))) ich bin mir sicher, dass das Tiradretti war, wer sonst haette Interesse auf den Fehler aufmerksam zu machen? Gruss -- Udimu (talk) 12:35, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

auf DE zitierst Du ein Buch von ihm, ohne das Buch einzusehen, kann ich da nichts machen, das Buch stammt mit Sicherheit nicht von Francesco. Gruss -- Udimu (talk) 12:38, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ich war mal so frei, die Änderungen im deutschsprachigen Artikel zu übernehmen. Als Einzelnachweis findet sich nun die Website, das dürfte ja dann legitim sein. ;) So eine Verwechslung ist freilich unangenehm und peinlich, kann aber vorkommen. Wurde ja zum Glück korrigiert. LG;--Dr.Lantis (talk) 12:47, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

danke dir! Gruss -- Udimu (talk) 12:58, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've heard about the Bocchoris vase sometime before, but for one reason or another I have always been too busy or lazy to search something about it, so thanks for its creation. This, however, led me to a little riddle: does the name "Bocchoris" originates from "Bakenrenef", or rather from "Wahkare"? Khruner (talk) 10:46, 9 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I guess Bocchoris comes from Bakenrenef. These Late Period king's names are often not very close to what we expect from the Hieroglyphs (one weird example is Apries, that must come from Wahibre or Haaibre). Well, guess where I was on holidays? And there I saw the vase in the museum ;-)-- Udimu (talk) 06:05, 12 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Should have known it from your Commons uploads! Plenty of archaeological sites and findings, many of which - like the vase - located in my country, and many others in several other countries. Khruner (talk) 17:34, 12 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Udimu. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Udmi, could you help Nyuserre Ini's current bid for reaching featured article status by simply commenting your opinion on the matter here? I have trouble garnering enough comments for the article. If you accept to comment, you can either directly oppose or support the article by writing Oppose or Support (depending on your opinion) followed by a brief explanation of why, or if you want to see improvements before reaching a decision, you can write them after Comments by Udimu and I will address all of them as best as I can. Your help is very much appreciated: this is the only stage in the article review process which is entirely up to people wanting to give their opinions and where I can't do anything myself. Iry-Hor (talk) 21:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi! There is something that keeps me rotating: clay seal impressions and stone vase fragments with the name of Peribsen mention two important cities: Setjet (today Sethroe) and Per-medjed (today Oxyrhynchos). Well, many Egyptologists still believe that Peribsen ruled only over Lower Egypt. But the cities of Setjet and Per-medjet are located at Upper Egypt! And, as we know, both of these cities enjoyed great importance and popularity through the whole history of Egypt. I highly doubt that Peribsen could have founded several(!) cities in a part of Egypt that allegedly did not accept him as a ruler. What do you think? Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 13:12, 16 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Peribsen ruled in Upper Egypt. His tomb was in Upper Egypt, at Abydos. Not sure if that is right with Setjet (today Sethroe) and Per-medjed (today Oxyrhynchos). best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 06:30, 17 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Both identifications and locations were made by the Egyptologists Eva-Maria Engel, Wolfgang Helck and Eberhard Otto, see references. And one lil' argument against your thought (*g*): Khasekhemwy ruled over all of Egypt, but had his tomb at Abydos, too... ;o) Regards;--Nephiliskos (talk) 08:11, 17 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I do not understand your point, Peribsen ruled in Upper Egypt (so the article) and these towns are in Upper Egypt (if the identification is correct). best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 07:55, 18 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd like to know your opinion about the newly-discovered pyramid of the 13th Dynasty at Dahshur, in particular its ownership. One of the pictures is plenty of hardly readable cartouches, and I've seen someone believing to read Ay (Merneferre)'s name, also because of his long reign. Khruner (talk) 17:28, 5 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It seems to read Ameny Qemau (suggested by Kim Ryholt on EEF - i think he is right, see now here: http://english.ahram.org.eg/News/262348.aspx). That is rather weird, as his pyramid was already found and excavated about 60 years ago. bw -- Udimu (talk) 18:40, 5 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Very odd indeed. I hoped that this rare SIP pyramid could bring some light on some obscure king of the period, and it turned out that it belongs to a ruler who already have one. I'm somewhat disappointed. Khruner (talk) 19:37, 5 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

now a friend told me, that they most likely just rediscovered/rexcavated the Ameny Qemau pyramid (I did not really follow the news). It is just strange that they missed the block when first time excavating the pyramid. best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 19:45, 5 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Then it would be even more disapponting, not to mention surreal. I need to investigate more before someone creates an article about a pyramid which actually exists already. Khruner (talk) 21:07, 5 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

it is disappointing. It is known that Dahshur is full of 13th Dynasty pyramids, instead of excavating an unknown one, they hit a known one! The new text (i guess pyramid texts on a stela, a similat stela was found in the tomb of king Hor) is a nice new find. best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 08:34, 6 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

		Thank you for creating several articles on women and their works over the past couple of months. We have become aware of your contributions thanks to research undertaken by Bobo.03 at the University of Minnesota. You might be interested in becoming a member of our WikiProject Women in Red where we are actively trying to reduce Wikipedia's content gender gap. If you would like to receive news of our activities without becoming a member, you can simply add your name to our mailing list. In any case, thank you for actively contributing to the coverage of women (currently, 17.11% of English Wikipedia's biographies). Our priorities for October: Women and disability Healthcare Geofocus: Nordic countries Continuing from month to month: #1day1woman Global Initiative
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Ipigott (talk) 10:18, 3 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Udimu. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Diary of Merer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heliopolis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 27 January 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Portals WikiProject has been rebooted.

You are invited to join, and participate in the effort to revitalize and improve the Portal system and all the portals in it.

There are sections on the WikiProject page dedicated to tasks (including WikiGnome tasks too), and areas on the talk page for discussing the improvement and automation of the various features of portals.

Many complaints have been lodged in the RfC to delete all portals, pointing out their various problems. They say that many portals are not maintained, or have fallen out of date, are useless, etc. Many of the !votes indicate that the editors who posted them simply don't believe in the potential of portals anymore.

It's time to change all that. Let's give them reasons to believe in portals, by revitalizing them.

The best response to a deletion nomination is to fix the page that was nominated. The further underway the effort is to improve portals by the time the RfC has run its course, the more of the reasons against portals will no longer apply. RfCs typically run 30 days. There are 19 days left in this one. Let's see how many portals we can update and improve before the RfC is closed, and beyond.

A healthy WikiProject dedicated to supporting and maintaining portals may be the strongest argument of all not to delete.

We may even surprise ourselves and exceed all expectations. Who knows what we will be able to accomplish in what may become the biggest Wikicollaboration in years.

Let's do this.

See ya at the WikiProject!

Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   10:25, 21 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The RfC discussion to eliminate portals was closed May 12, with the statement "There exists a strong consensus against deleting or even deprecating portals at this time." This was made possible because you and others came to the rescue. Thank you for speaking up.

By the way, the current issue of the Signpost features an article with interviews about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

I'd also like to let you know that the Portals WikiProject is working hard to make sure your support of portals was not in vain. Toward that end, we have been working diligently to innovate portals, while building, updating, upgrading, and maintaining them. The project has grown to 80 members so far, and has become a beehive of activity.

Our two main goals at this time are to automate portals (in terms of refreshing, rotating, and selecting content), and to develop a one-page model in order to make obsolete and eliminate most of the 150,000 subpages from the portal namespace by migrating their functions to the portal base pages, using technologies such as selective transclusion. Please feel free to join in on any of the many threads of development at the WikiProject's talk page, or just stop by to see how we are doing. If you have any questions about portals or portal development, that is the best place to ask them.

If you would like to keep abreast of developments on portals, keep in mind that the project's members receive updates on their talk pages. The updates are also posted here, for your convenience.

Again, we can't thank you enough for your support of portals, and we hope to make you proud of your decision. Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   11:17, 25 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

P.S.: if you reply to this message, please ((ping)) me. Thank you. -TT

There are 3 different spellings of Maherperi in the article. Maiherperi, Maherpri. I guess it depends on the English, French or German source. Worth changing?MBG02 (talk) 07:54, 2 August 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I changed that, according to the article Maiherpri. None of the spellings is right or wrong. -- Udimu (talk) 07:58, 2 August 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

• Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
• Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
• Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
• No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
• If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
• Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
• Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! S Philbrick(Talk) 14:05, 14 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Udimu. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Udimu. I noticed that you recently used celebstrendnow.com as a source for information in a biography article, Robert LaSardo. I am unable to find any evidence or discussion indicating that celebstrendnow.com meets reliable sourcing criteria for the inclusion of personal information in such articles. If you disagree, let's discuss it. Thanks.--Ronz (talk) 17:31, 19 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ronz ː i spend quite a while looking for data on this actor. There is not much out on the web (however do you expect a peer reviewed article in the Oxford handbook of American actors??), there are some infos on imDb. That should be enough for the basic data. I do not think the big bubble is necessary. There are 1000s of articles where this is more needed. best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 09:48, 20 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Udimu. Re this edit, allstarbio.com doesn't appear reliable, similar to celebstrendnow.com. Websites such as these tend to copy from Wikipedia for their material. When it comes to biographical information, high-quality sources are required. --Ronz (talk) 19:47, 16 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hallo Ronz. I give up on this article. There are some interviews on Youtube with the actor, but I do not want give them as source. Nevertheless, you always put that label A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject in the article. This label was placed there in an earlier version when somebody wrote quite a lot. This text got that label, but the long text was later deleted, so the label is no longer needed. best wishes -- Udimu (talk) 20:47, 21 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Udimu ! I am currently proposing Sahure at FAC. However the article has so far received only one review support beyond the source and image checks. If this interests you and if you have some time to spare, could you possibly see if you could review the article for the FAC candidacy? Your review can be as short as a few sentences (or as long as pages!), either raising points you would like to see being addressed, or simply stating that you oppose/support the article with a few explanations. Don't worry if you prefer not to do it! Iry-Hor (talk) 11:38, 8 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Udimu, since I believe that your archaeological interests go far beyond ancient Egypt, I was wondering if you could share your opinion about this issue. Khruner (talk) 18:48, 5 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I check it. Sardinia is not really my thing...without the proper books here. bw --Udimu (talk) 06:57, 7 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:18, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	Season's Greetings
	Hi Udimu! Wishing you a Happy Holiday Season, and a beautiful and productive New Year! पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 13:15, 21 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there. This person is not currently mentioned on the article on Shulgi. I guess you are going to look at this, but I just thought I'd mention it — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:41, 8 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Martin. many thanks. I indeed forgot thatǃUdimu (talk) 08:29, 8 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just wanted to say I appreciate your work on the pages of Shulgi-simti, Nin-kalla, Ubartum and other historical figures from the Ur III period and particularly that you rely on recent, detailed studies (like Sharlach's monograph) and not on century old outdated generalist encyclopedias, works of various frauds like R. Graves, and the like which plague articles about ANE on Wikipedia. Much appreciated! HaniwaEnthusiast (talk) 09:51, 9 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi HaniwaEnthusiast. Many thanks, that is very kind ǃ I noted you did a lot of good work here on the ANE, much more than meǃUdimu (talk) 10:08, 9 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The category was deleted by a WP:CFD discussion, which means you are not at liberty to recreate it at your own personal whim. You're certainly at liberty to follow the WP:DRV process to try to convince people that the deletion was in error, but until you can get DRV to overturn CFD you must abide by the CFD decision whether you like it or not. And this is end of discussion from me; I'm not listening to any further argument about it. Bearcat (talk) 08:42, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And no, you're not entitled to just bypass the CFD discussion by recreating it at a slightly altered title like Category:Overseer of fields, either. Take it to DRV, or drop the stick. Bearcat (talk) 08:43, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]