Talk:Thutmose I

message: There is definitely still confusion over Egyptian dates. E.g. Reeves' "Valley of the Kings" uses the same dates as Wikipedia (which it says come from Baines' "Atlas of Ancient Egypt"), but Clayton's "Chronology of the Pharaohs" (a recent work) gives Tuthmosis I's reign as 1524-1518 (using a system which the author followed from Mumane's "Penguin Guide to Ancient Egypt"). Noel 01:06, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Old comments

message: This article looks to be in fair shape to me as a student of this discipline, so now I think it's time to run it past the laypersons. If it fails, at least it can be shaped up in thin areas. Thanatosimii 21:14, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've passed it (after some minor copyrighting). Well-written, well-sourced, and deserving of Good Article status. --JerryOrr 02:28, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Nomination

message: There has been DNA testing done on eighteenth Dynasty mummies. The conclusion was that it is highly probable that Amenhotep I is the father of Thutmose I.
http://www.egyptologyonline.com/using_dna.htm Welsh4ever76 06:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Thutmose I Paternity

message: The mummy that was thought to be Thutmosis I is not him. This mummy died when he was thirty, he died of an arrow wound and his arms were not crossed as a King's position. This was the conclusion of Dr. Zahi Hawass. There is a DNA match between Amenhotep I and Thutmosis II and III indicating that they share a common ancestor. Welsh4ever76 08:08, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, for what it's worth, mind adding that info to the article instead of just removing the mummy image? Captmondo 10:23, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Thutmosis I Mummy Image

message: This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject bad articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed. 
*The only issue here is the unsourced final sentance about the mummy. Can someone please source and expand this? Once done I'd be happy to pass.
I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made and issues are being addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Regards, Jackyd101 (talk) 17:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I have a source for this. Give me a day or two. -- Secisek (talk) 02:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Taking a peek at the section in question, there is insufficient context to understand the transition from Maspero's initial findings to the latest development. I think we need to add information regarding the subsequent examination by G. Elliot Smith which cast doubt on Maspero's identification, as well as the study conducted by Harris and Hussein (1991) on all the cached mummies. Also, I believe the mummy was finally withdrawn after the last CT scans in connection with Hatshepsut's mummy were made (at least that's how I'm interpreting the information in that link). — Zerida ☥ 20:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have decided to keep this at GA.--Jackyd101 (talk) 10:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Sweeps

message: It switched around the cities in the section on the heliacal rise of Sothis. The majority of egyptologists believe that the observation was made from Thebes, in 1517 BCE, and a minority of them believe that the observation was made from Memphis or Heliopolis in 1537 BCE. The article claimed that the majority believed it was made in Memphis or Heliopolis in 1517, and a minority believed it was made in Thebes in 1537. This directly contradicts the pages on Ahmose I and Amenhotep I. I have therefore edited it to read correctly. Lionboy-Renae (talk) 03:38, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong Cities (fixed)

message: I made the following change to the bio of Thutmose I, because it is in fact rather common knowledge and the previous Bio was incorrect, stating that Thutmose II suceeded him in rulership when in fact Hatshepsut  followed him and ruled as regent because Thutmose II was only a small boy at the time.  Here is the change, if anyone has an issue with this change, please discuss
Thutmose I (sometimes read as Thothmes, Thutmosis or Tuthmosis I, meaning Thoth-Born) was the third Pharaoh of the 18th dynasty of Egypt. He was given the throne after the death of the previous king Amenhotep I who, speculation exists, may have been of no blood relation, however Thutmose I is thought to have been the general of his armies . During his reign, dated by some Egyptologists as being from 1526 BCE to 1513 BCE or by others as being from 1506 BCE to 1493 BCE, he campaigned deep into the Levant and Nubia, pushing the borders of Egypt further than ever before. He also built many temples in Egypt and built a tomb for himself in the Valley of the Kings; he is the first king confirmed to have done this (though Amenhotep I may have preceded him). He was succeeded by his daughter from his primary wife Hatshepsut, who ruled as regent in a co-rulership with Thutmose I son from a secondary wife. After marrying Thutmose II and ruling with him for three years Hatshepsut is thought to have orchestrated his death and continued to rule as Pharaoh, even wearing a fake beard and dress of a man. The reign of Hatshepsut was followed by that of her son Thutmose III who is thought to have torn down and defaced all images of her in an attempt to erase her rulership from Egyptian history.
Thanks98.92.244.28 (talk) 15:29, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Your assertion that it is common knowledge is unestablished, and your record of attempting to use fringe material casts significant doubt on your claims. In any case, Wikipedia requires sources for any disputed points. If it is "common knowledge", it should be especially easy for you to provide one.--Jeffro77 (talk) 21:53, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes to Thutmose I Biography 

message: Wikipedia can't even be consistent with itself.  This page states it as a fact she died as an infant, but her own Wikipedia page admits it's merely assumed by lack of reference.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.92.229.89 (talk) 05:54, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nefrubity 

message: "He was given the throne after the feast of the PETA Amenhotep I." What on Earth does PETA mean in this context? Even if it's not a  mistake, it should be replaced with something more generally comprehensible.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.105.74 (talk) 02:41, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "PETA Amenhotep I"?