Talk:Pyramid of Userkaf

Unclear Section

I removed the below and saved it here. I'm unable to determine its meaning. It may be miscopied from another article.

The was found by the chines temple courtyard, a colossal statue of the king was raised.

Mzmadmike (talk) 16:22, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pyramid of Userkaf/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ben MacDui (talk · contribs) 18:18, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

At a first glance the article looks in reasonable shape but is going to require some work on the lead section and references. I'll progress using the list below asap. Ben MacDui 18:18, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality: Passable

   I am not clear what is meant by "yielded the name of Neferhetepes wife of Userkaf and mother of Sahure." Does this mean: " yielded the name "Neferhetepes wife of Userkaf and mother of Sahure". "?

Y I clarified this. What I meant was that the name Neferhetepes was found, as well as some of her titles. But, the reference I cite does not say which titles. Thus, I only wrote what is cited: firstly that the name Neferhetepes was found, and secondly that she is known to have been Userkaf's wife and the mother of Sahure. Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

1. Am I right in thinking that this same story is repeated immediately below in the "Discovery" sub-section?

Y Yes you're right ! I don't know why I did not spot it before. Anyway I rewrote this passage to eliminate the redundancy. Iry-Hor (talk) 10:53, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

1. B. MoS compliance:

   The lead should refer to all the sections in the article. Please read WP:LEAD carefully and fix.

Y Fixed, the lead now refers to all sections of the article. Iry-Hor (talk) 14:54, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

1. I am not happy with the use of the bold paragraph headings such as Change of ideology. If you thing this is acceptable please indicate where this is stated by MOS. If not, please change to sentence style e.g. "The first conjecture is that this was a change of ideology." or use sub-section headers.

Y Fine but can we keep the bulleted list ? In any case, MOS or not, I found the bold font to be much clearer than how it is now. What do you think ? (forget the MOS one instant). Iry-Hor (talk) 21:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

1. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   Why "Djoser Netjerikhet". The second word is not one I am familiar with.

Y Netjerikhet is the real horus name of pharaoh Djoser, Djoser being a name given to him during the much later New Kingdom. I recognize that everybody call this pharaoh Djoser and not by his real name Netjerikhet and thus I have removed the "Netjerikhet" from the article. Iry-Hor (talk) 21:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

1. Please explain what a "pented roof" is or link to Wiktionary or a wiki article. Similarly, "canopic chest" and "magazine room".

Y Pented roof -> gabled roof, I also added wiki articles for "canopic chest". As for "magazine room" it is just a storage room. For some reason all books and publications on pyramid architecture use the term "magazine" instead of storage. So the first time "magazine" appears I have put a footnote explaining that this is a storage room. Iry-Hor (talk) 21:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

1. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Please provide a publisher and access date for all citations and ensure the style is consistent.

   The sentences /paras ending as follows lack citations:

   Since Perring had already buried the robbers tunnel by that time, K. R. Lepsius did not investigate the pyramid any further.Y Ref. added

   even though its first few meters are still visible today.Y Added the reference. Iry-Hor (talk) 21:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

   attributed to his wife, queen Neferhetepes.Y Added the reference. Iry-Hor (talk) 21:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

   also dug in its midst, damaging it. Y Ref. added

   a boat with its crew and names of Upper and Lower Egyptian estates connected to the cult of the king. Y Ref. added

   large granite blocks framing the outer door. Y Ref. added

   hosting the entrance to the mortuary temple.Y Ref. added

   pyramid still visible today.Y Ref. added

   There was however no red granite paneling over the lower part of the pyramid as in the case of the Pyramid of Menkaure.Y Ref. added

   unique of all the 5th and 6th dynasty pyramids. Y Ref. added

   depictions of animal processions and offerings carriers moving towards the Shrine of the Queen.Y Ref. added

   Khaemweset with offering bearers.Y Added the reference. Iry-Hor (talk) 21:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

   No original research:

   Pass

2. Is it broad in its coverage?

   Pass

3. Is it neutral?

   Pass

4. Is it stable?

   Pass

5. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   Pass

   However, I am not happy with the image in the infobox. It is an impressive sight but the uninitiated might well assume that Djoser's pyramid was Userkafs. Better to use it elsewhere to illustrate the necropolis.

Y Good idea, I put another picture showing only Userkaf's pyramid. Iry-Hor (talk) 21:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

1. File:Userkaf Pyramid Substructure.png looks like a decent piece of work, but can you confirm that this is reliably sourced/a genuinely accurate illustration?

Y Yes I can confirm that this is a reliable source as a similar view is available in Mark Lehner's book The complete pyramids. I have added this reference to the caption of the figure. Iry-Hor (talk) 21:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

1. MOS does not allow for the mini-gallery after "Offering chapel". Ditto "Construction" and "Mortuary Temple". Please remove or redistribute these images.

MOS galleries I am not sure to see where in the MOS is such use of galleries prohibited. Could you indicate where such use is discouraged ? Iry-Hor (talk) 21:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Galleries are not prohibited but they are discouraged unless they meet the criteria specified. In this instance I don't think they do - feel free to persuade me if you like, but some of them seem rather indistinct and repetitive and the remainder could well fit in, in the normal fashion.Ben MacDui 08:28, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I think it is important to give many pictures of the pyramid complex, not only to show how it is today, but also to show the different computer reconstructions that have been made. This gives the reader an idea of what the pyramid looks like today, but also what it might have looked like at the time of its construction. Sadly, if I remove the galleries, I don't think there will be enough space in the text to show the required pictures: some computer reconstructions will have to be left out, when they clearly illustrate the organization of the complex. Alternatively, pictures of the pyramid as it is today could be removed, but then they show what the pyramid really is. Thus I found no better alternative than galleries to do so. When I have rewritten the lead and all other points have been cleared, I will try removing the galleries to see if it works. An article where this will clearly not be possible is the Pyramid of Sahure where the galleries illustrate the most important elements of the pyramid complex just after they have been discussed in the text. Given that the pyramid of Sahure is renowned for its reliefs, columns, star ceilings etc. and is better documented than Userkaf's, the galleries in that case are, I think, essential. Maybe you could have a glance a this article, and tell me what you think. Iry-Hor (talk) 10:37, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

1. Overall:

   On Hold

I will continue to do the required changes tomorrow. Iry-Hor (talk) 21:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Good progress and no hurry at all. Ben MacDui 08:28, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I will change the lead and all remaining points as soon as I am back from holidays. Thanks for the constructive review anyway ! Iry-Hor (talk) 15:31, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Going on an extended break whilst having two articles at GAN is not best practice. There is a suggestion above that you are expecting me to fail this nomination, which I will have to do if the work is not complete by 12th September. Ben MacDui 09:17, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Regretfully, I have failed the article. It is not so very far away from GA and I encourage you to try again on your return. Regards, Ben MacDui 08:26, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

No problem I understand ! I will implement the changes and nominate the article again. Iry-Hor (talk) 11:15, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

All required references have been added and all other changes advocated by the reviewer have been implemented. I will renominate this article. Iry-Hor (talk) 21:48, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pyramid of Userkaf/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Redtigerxyz (talk · contribs) 10:35, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Please add dates for Userkaf, Djedkare Isesi, Djoser, Khafra, much later Saite period, Khaemweset, 26/3/4/5th Dynasty etc. YDone. Add ending for Saite. --Redtigerxyz Talk 06:21, 31 January 2013 (UTC) Y Done. Iry-Hor (talk) 11:48, 2 February 2013 (UTC) What is a Cult pyramid? short explanation for clarity. Y It was a pyramid destined to receive the Ka (the soul) of the pharaoh and housed a statue representing the soul. I added a sentence explaining this as well as two references on cult pyramids. Iry-Hor (talk) 19:58, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	The lead introduces new info about the predecessor. It should be put in the "first hypothesis". Why does the lead favour the first hypothesis? YExperts on 5th dynasty pyramids such as Verner and Lehner (see their books cited) all agree that they were indeed profound changes of the ideology of kingship from the 4th to the 5th dynasties: the pyramids became smaller but much more decorated, the pharaohs concentrated on building solar temples rather than their own tombs etc. The first hypothesis asserts that these changes affected the layout of the temple. I changed the lead slightly so that it says that they were indeed changes of ideology but is not affirmative and does not say that these affected the size and decoration of the complex. Note, about why these changes may have started under Userkaf's predecessor, see the wiki page on Shepseskaf. If you think I should change it more, let me know. Iry-Hor (talk) 20:17, 27 January 2013 (UTC) The lead does not cover the present state of complex, only the pyramid is covered. YYou're right I added something on the current state of the complex.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Add author, date, publisher, isbn (if applicable), page nos., language (for non-Engish) for all references, including web ones. Y Done. Iry-Hor (talk) 11:48, 2 February 2013 (UTC) You may want to separate explanatory and reference notes. (Not compulsory) I don't know exactly what you mean ? Iry-Hor (talk) 11:48, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
	2c. it contains no original research.	There are many graphic images, which are created by users. Are these based on any books or other references? Else may be viewed as OR. The computer generated renderings of the pyramid are indeed user-created but as far as I can tell, they match the plans and layout of the pyramids and their complexes as shown in Mark Lehner's book. If you want I remove the pictures or can add to the captions that these are "possible" recreations. Iry-Hor (talk) 19:41, 27 January 2013 (UTC) Remove if references not found. --Redtigerxyz Talk 06:21, 31 January 2013 (UTC) Y Done. Iry-Hor (talk) 11:48, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	The Layout img does not have the mortuary temple? YYes it does, the mortuary temple is the ensemble courtyard + chapel + entrance corridor as well as some magazine rooms. I edited the caption for this to be clear. Iry-Hor (talk) 19:37, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
	7. Overall assessment.	ON HOLD Pass GA. Comments addressed