Dear Llinus (if I may call you that),
Thank you for your reasoning on KV55. I can't say I disagree with it though I thought including a reference to the difficulties of using modern forensics to date ancient mummies was useful...to illustrate how impossible it was to claim the mummy was just a young person when he died. The Gabolde note, though is quite correct since it does place undue weight on the views of one scholar when there are so many differing views on the KV55 king. Thanks for pointing out that Waenre was actually part of Akhenaten's titulary. Gabolde certainly knew this but I did not. I thought it was another epithet like Meryamun. Yes, I really can't see who else the KV55 mummy can be except Akhenaten; this could be settled if modern forensics didn't give us so strange results for the Egyptian mummies.

As an aside, you are quite right that wiki is not perfect. It has several flaws...the chief one being vandalism and then WP:OR contributions by some crackpots. (yes Hatshepsut's article was vandalized again) But there are a few plusses: at least, with wiki, one can create articles on many fairly obscure temples or archaeological sites such as Trajan's Kiosk, Amada, Temple of Beit el-Wali or Kiosk of Qertassi. In every case, I created the articles and managed to source images for them from flickr users who were happy to see them used on Wikipedia. I hope you like them. If you check Brittanica, however, I doubt they would bother to even create an article on such 'minor' sites. Thank You,