Talk:Cleopatra's Needles

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Architecture C‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Ancient Egypt C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egyptological subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient EgyptTemplate:WikiProject Ancient EgyptAncient Egypt articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ancient Egypt to-do list: edit history watch purge Needed articles. We should have an article on every pyramid and every nome in Ancient Egypt. I'm sure the rest of us can think of other articles we should have. Cleanup. To start with, most of the general history articles badly need attention. And I'm told that at least some of the dynasty articles need work. Any other candidates? Standardize the Chronology. A boring task, but the benefit of doing it is that you can set the dates !(e.g., why say Khufu lived 2589-2566? As long as you keep the length of his reign correct, or cite a respected source, you can date it 2590-2567 or 2585-2563) Stub sorting Anyone? I consider this probably the most unimportant of tasks on Wikipedia, but if you believe it needs to be done . . . Data sorting. This is a project I'd like to take on some day, & could be applied to more of Wikipedia than just Ancient Egypt. Take one of the standard authorities of history or culture -- Herotodus, the Elder Pliny, the writings of Breasted or Kenneth Kitchen, & see if you can't smoothly merge quotations or information into relevant articles. Probably a good exercise for someone who owns one of those impressive texts, yet can't get access to a research library.

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): RobertYe.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the introductory paragraph end with "in California"? There isn't even a full stop, and the inclusion of the words "in California" makes no sense and have no relevence in the context of the sentence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.144.200.8 (talk) 16:31, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is an article in All the Year Round “Not a Whitechapel Needle,” 8 October 1859, 562-64 on the fact that the British have not brought home the Egyptian gift and that travelers are chipping off pieces to bring home.Jonathan.h.grossman (talk) 17:07, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The image is like watching a Cinemascope movie on TV, while lying sideways on the sofa. I'm just not crazy about the formatting in this particular case. "Not that there's anything wrong with that." Wetman 21:51, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Currently there are only pictures of the London needle. Shouldn't the other ones be depicted as well?

Gotha bombers were already attacking London in June, so the raid of September 4 cannot have been the "first air raid on London by German aeroplanes". Bastie 19:53, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• I've corrected the statement Ephebi 13:33, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, from tour commentary on the Westminster to Greenwich ferry, it's said that the Sphinxes were mounted the wrong way around (facing in, rather than out), and when this was discovered on the day of innaugration, it was highly embarrasing in front of egyptian officials, and the person responsible for the mistake committed suicide out of shame. I can't find any documentary evidence for this. I find partial evidence from a Doctor Who episode (http://www.whoniverse.org/history/19thcentury.php), but it's difficult to know how factual that is. --mgream 10:46, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that a time capsual was included as part of the foundations for the London one. Can this be looked into? - Aaron Jethro 04:22, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There're no refences or acknowledgements at all on this page! What book/website did the translations come from?

Also, why are all the 'edit' links separated from their individual paragraphs/sections and arranged in a single line further down the page?

The text would seem to suggest that the erosion on one face of the needle has happened since it was moved to New York, and the gaps in the translation presumably relate to that eroded face. Is one or both of these incorrect, or did no-one think to copy the eroding hyroglyphics before they were completely gone? FiggyBee 10:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article says there's no connection to Cleopatra, but a few lines further down, it says the obelisks were moved as a tribute for Mark Antony on behalf of Cleopatra. Isn't that a connection? LightSpeed 17:16, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The section of the article about the obelisk in Central Park says:

At its base are four 900-pound, 19th-century bronze replicas of crabs, which were first placed there by the Romans and are on display in the Met.

This seems to want clarification. I was unaware that the Romans were ever in Central Park, although they did get around. - Smerdis of Tlön 19:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed: there is a memoir by a Navy guy named Seaton Schroeder, who wrote about moving the obelisk w/ Gorringe from Alexandria to NYC. According to him, they originally left it @Coney Island; & that base was moved separately, which is why it wound up in the Met: it was never reattached. But the Romans were in neither Central Park nor Coney Island. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.162.128.52 (talk) 13:05, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• In german and Spanish Wikipedia only the obelisk in New York and the obelisk in London are called Cleopatras Needle, but not the obelisk in Paris.
• Projekt Gutenberg Spiegel: Altertümer (german)

212.95.118.52 (talk) 01:23, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above mentioning of only the two is refered to as Cleopatra's needles is correct. The entire page should be restructured, since it is misleading due to simplicity

All of the mentioned obelisks plus the remains of a another in Istanbul is remains of a total number of six erected by [[[Thutmose III]], two in Deir-Al-Bari, two in Karnak and two in the Ra temple in Heliopolis, which were moved to Alexandria. These two stands in New York and London today.

Two has vanished, one is erected at the Lateran in Rome and the last is in (as before mentioned) in Istanbul Istanbul#Ancient_Greek_and_Roman_monuments —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.160.207.18 (talk) 11:46, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• The French needle is also known (in French obviously) as Cleopatras Needle, and indeed was probably the first to use the nickname. Obviously in reality none have anything to do with Cleopatra at all. The only qualification to be a Cleopatras Needle is to be called that as a nickname. This was all explained in a previous version, which I will restore. Johnbod (talk) 18:35, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• In all the years I was raised, and lived, in Paris, I have NEVER heard the "Obélisque de la Concorde" referred to as "l"aiguille de Cléopatre"; the term "Cleopatra's Needle" I only heard from foreign tourists..... Renaud OLGIATI (talk) 16:47, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The London 's needle is also mentionned in "the golem's eye" second opus of the trilogy of Bartimeus (Jonathan Stroud) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.213.216.62 (talk) 14:00, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Depiction of the iron cylinder in danger of sinking.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/yourpaintings/paintings/the-cleopatra-cylinder-vessel-31120

Artist died 1880.

©Geni 22:30, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested to know why Thothmes' name is written 'men-kheper-re' on the sphinxes (in London) with the scarab beetle, instead of as Thothmes which uses the ibis hieroglyph. Was it a nickname? There's no explanation of this on this page nor on Thothmes' page.VenomousConcept (talk) 20:22, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thothmes/Thutmose/Thothmosis

It's his throne name. Modern historians generally refer to pharaohs by their birth names, but in ancient Egypt, kings were more widely known by their throne names. In official writings, the two names usually appeared together in cartouches, but if only one name was used, it was the throne name. I suppose the sphinxes were meant to imitate Egyptian monuments in that respect. A. Parrot (talk) 00:28, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks. Just starting to try to read hieroglyphs. It is confusing when they have so many names for themselves.VenomousConcept (talk) 20:35, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As this article described three different obelisks I have split it and turned it into a disambiguation page. Most content has been transferred to the other articles. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:54, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed my mind, it is probably worth having a general article about the needles, pointing to the separate articles with more details. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:28, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article has now been greatly reduced in size, and was given a silly rename to Cleopatra's Needles, which I've reversed. I'm struggling to see any benefit from these changes, which were imposed virtually without notice. What do others think? Johnbod (talk) 14:08, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The benefits are now we have separate articles on separate obelisks all of which have different stories, different navigation templates, categories, etc. The shared history remains in this article, but otherwise conflating the articles is confusing. As an analogy with people, you'll notice that on List of twins some have joint articles but most have separate articles for the two different people. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:06, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The "no connection to Cleopatra" statement was added 18 years ago in 2004. Above at #Cleopatra connection this was challenged, but ignored.

Well it turns out that we have been wrong for almost two decades. The needles stood for almost two millennia at the Caesareum of Alexandria, which was conceived by Cleopatra. She may not have built the needles, but they were definitely associated with her. Onceinawhile (talk) 08:58, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The request to rename this article to Cleopatra's Needles has been carried out. If the page title has consensus, be sure to close this discussion using {{subst:RM top|'''page moved'''.}} and {{subst:RM bottom}} and remove the {{Requested move/dated|…}} tag, or replace it with the {{subst:Requested move/end|…}} tag.

Cleopatra's Needle → Cleopatra's Needles – Per WP:PLURAL, and consistent with Luxor Obelisks. Onceinawhile (talk) 04:47, 11 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 09:52, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

yes, seems reasonable. And So It (talk) 14:08, 11 August 2022 (UTC) strike sock — Preceding unsigned comment added by GizzyCatBella (talk • contribs) 00:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• This move was considered controversial back in 2016. Courtesy ping MSGJ and Johnbod who were involved then. Favonian (talk) 15:17, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Johnbod (talk) 15:45, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Oppose - "The Luxor Obelisks (French: Obélisques de Louxor) are a pair of Ancient Egyptian obelisks", so there is no option; the consistency argument is nonsense. The pieces called Cleopatra's Needle are all individual, and all called by the singular. That there are a number of them, very widely dispersed, does not matter. No source ever talks of "Cleopatra's Needles". Which part of WP:PLURAL do you think supports this? I can't see one. They are not a particular class or type of obelisk, other than having been set up a very long way from home. Johnbod (talk) 15:45, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Johnbod: I think you might be commenting on the wrong article? Or an old version of it (it was improved very significantly earlier this year)? This article is only about a pair of obelisks known originally as "Les aiguilles de Cléopâtre", when they sat next to each other outside Cleopatra’s Caesareum of Alexandria. Like the Luxor obelisks they now sit in different cities, but are very much a pair.

For sources which describe "Cleopatra’s Needles”, please see for example the external links section at the bottom of the article with two encyclopedia articles on the topic. Onceinawhile (talk) 12:52, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, they are a pair. But the best sources you can find with the plural name are two popular American works over a century old? Johnbod (talk) 13:14, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, they are just the other encyclopedias already linked in the article. Other encyclopedias have done the same. So have some 20th and 21st century book titles like Christopher Niall Elliott in 2019, Bob Brier in 2016, R. A. Hayward in 1978, Aubrey Noakes in 1962. Onceinawhile (talk) 13:59, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnbod: please could you take another look based on the above? Onceinawhile (talk) 02:18, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked, but I still don't think the plural meets WP:COMMONNAME. Johnbod (talk) 16:37, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per Johnbod, the use of the singular in the sources, and per the N-gram tally. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:38, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  We already have articles for the singular usage – Cleopatra's Needle (London) and Cleopatra's Needle (New York). This is what ngrams shows.

  The sources which describe the pair – i.e. the subject of this article (examples given above), use the plural.

  Onceinawhile (talk) 02:16, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Similar to the two The Magic Circle paintings which have one article entitled with the singular. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:36, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Although, that page should have a 's' added, so it's The Magic Circle (Waterhouse paintings). Now a red link, I think I'll do a bold move on that one as it makes sense as a plural title (but not an example for adding 's' to Needle). Randy Kryn (talk) 05:13, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]