Talk:Neferneferuaten

message: Hi - is the existance of these monarch generally accepted ? Markh 13:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi, thats a fairly complete answer, however I'm still not sure that this is generally accepted, and the articles need to show this. having read Manetho, the 18th Dynasty is very confused, especially at the end and the identification of who is who in KV55 is uncertain. I'm also not saying any of the above is wrong either. I need to read through the documents, all of which look interesting. Markh 21:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Great stuff. I'm OK with what is Dodson and Allen (although I haven't read anything other than the conclusion). I'm not sure about Manetho, as it is less clear and at least second hand via Josephus, etc. If this is now more accepted, then that is great. There maybe a need to have an Amarna Succession article, just to clarify, or at least note, the uncertainty (there I go again). I read the Barbara Waterson book's chapter on KV55 last night and I may add some stuff from this later. Markh 07:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I find some parts of this article highly suggestive and making assumptions on the correctness of specific views, which are still debated. For instance, the comment "this ruler here can only be the Smenkhkare" seems to state this as a fact, while it's not nearly established as such and the subject of much debate: this body could also be that of Ahkenaten himself. The articles on Ahkenaten and Smenkhkare are much more objective, stating the possibilities and the various arguments (or at least the references to such arguments) of experts in the field.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.229.224.57 (talk) 12:09, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled "start of talk"

message: An easy way to understand the meaning of names, etc, or translating is understanding the ending "u" of words. They can be made with a "Quail chick", or "coil" hieroglyph. G43-Z7
(Also Akhenaten used the plural, as 3 of one hieroglyph, the "nfr-nfr-nfr" specifically in Nefertiti's name.(Beauty-nefer))(total of 4 nfr's)
Using a capital U leads to understanding that the second syllable is the plural: neferU. The translation becomes, easy, and obvious: (The) Beauty (of the) Most Beautiful (of) Aten.
Many versions can be made of this: "Aten's Beauty of the Most Beautiful."....(i.e. neferU is the Superlative)...("Beauty of Beauties" is the direct translation, but does not convey the superlative.).... (from the SonoranDesert,.. ArizonaUSA).....Mmcannis (talk) 19:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Nefer-neferU-aten

message: Under "Candidates for Neferneferuaten's original identity" JP Allen's 15 page paper is summarized and dismissed in 2 sentences betray a NPOV. Consider:
However, she will have been no more than ten years old by the time that Neferneferuaten appears as king, making her perhaps a less likely option that her adult and already-powerful mother.
A) The quote misrepresents and omits a key part of the paper. Allen spends several pages illustrating how N. Jr may have been as old as 13 by regnal year 17. Characterizing an age of 10 as fact contradicts the source cited. (she is generally seen as about 10, but that is his point - maybe she is older).
B) Text rendering judgement on its overall credibility ought to be done on its own merits or against accepted evidence, not in comparison to some other theory ('her already-powerful mother').  A proponent of Meritaten or N. Jr. could make the reverse non NPOV that 'the youthful Meritaten is a more likely option than her aging and  her elderly mother'.  
Working on a more expansive and neutral version...Plutonix (talk) 16:37, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: I thought the original article was pretty good in dealing with the historiography (mostly from Sunset) but presenting evidence as needed for the subsequent theories seemed sub optimal.  
* Added a presentation of what the evidence is separate from what it means (except for 2 stela key to some theories).  This was to make the narratives flow better and hopefully make it easier for the reader just entering these tarpits to understand the issues/evidence.  Additionally, by not mixing evidence with what it (might) means, the Smenk. entry could reference the same sections.  Otherewise, these sections are largely the same as before.
I tried to be mindful of the sentiments in the long talk arguments offered in the "move to redirect page" discussion by rereading them several times.  Some of the args there are tortured, split fine hairs, just plain wrong or are related to pet theories. But it seems that some have an emotional investment.  I expanded the sections on theories for the above reasons and to treat the main ones with more detail:
* Added a section on Manetho. I dont find Manetho of much probative value, but a few seem quite invested in him.
* Added a focus on Gabolde's Smenkhkare==Zannanza theory since he is such a staunch supprter of Neferneferuaten=Meritaten.
* Added a sub section focused on Amarna Sunset.  Mainly because it is so recent and the most comprehensive presentation to appear in several decades with almost half the book dedicated to the issue.   
* Expanded coverage of Allen's tasherit theory as it is represents the lone truly new idea to come our way in 30 years.  The main changes were in criticizing it on its own merits rather than in comparison to the Nefertiti theory.
* Maybe the expansions will help the entry loose it's B/Start-Class ratings
* Added some graphics
* Added a section on 'Smenkhkare and the Amarna Succession' NOT to try and settle with the issue, but to 'remove' Smenkhkare from the Summary where I wanted to try and detail what little is known about Neferneferuten in a clear manner without a bunch of conditionals.  I later figured out how to do that in one sentence, but sort of liked the points made in the Succession section.
Finally, readability for those with mininal knowledge about Egypt was a priority.  To wit, "throne name" vs prenomen; and "Akhet-en-hyes" vs зht-n-h.s (content should be understandable without knowledge of transcription codes); Amarna vs Akhetaten (to avoid confusion with the King); shabti vs ushabti and always Ankh-et-kheperure instead of Ankhetkheperure for clarity.   Plutonix (talk) 15:47, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revised, Expanded 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Neferneferuaten. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://cassian.memphis.edu/history/murnane/Allen.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:12, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi everyone,
There are a number of pictures that I have recently added into the body of the article that are definitely Neferneferuaten (for instance, there is no doubt in the academic community that I am aware of that the figurines of a female Pharaoh in Tut's tomb are Neferneferuaten). There is also the carving of Akhenaten and "Smenkhare" (Many believe this to be Nefertiti) that was uploaded to the Italian wikipedia, and it displays an image of Akhenaten caressing this female sovereign, who is wearing a khepresh (Berlin's Stele 17813). I personally feel that this archeological evidence is overwhelming enough to place an image of her in the infobox. More experienced Wikpedians please feel free to disagree, but I think the evidence for her reign is overwhelming and that these images of a female pharaoh are almost definitely her, whether her identity is Nefertiti or not.
Neddy1234 (talk) 21:17, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Neferneferuaten. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120301142642/http://cassian.memphis.edu/history/murnane/Allen.pdf to http://cassian.memphis.edu/history/murnane/Allen.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131012051415/http://cassian.memphis.edu/history/murnane/M_Gabolde.pdf to http://cassian.memphis.edu/history/murnane/M_Gabolde.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:10, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018) 

message: I don't see how this precludes a coregency.  A prior 18th-Dynasty female Pharaoh, Hatshepsut, served as coregent for her husband's secondary wife's son (Tutmoses III) for decades.  Like Nerfertiti, she was not the heir's mother, but WAS the deceased's king's primary wife.  
Or am I missing something? Tabbycatlove (talk) 04:11, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "the central assumption that Nefertiti was mother to Tutankhaten, has since been proven false"