This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East related articles 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 Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq 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.IraqWikipedia:WikiProject IraqTemplate:WikiProject IraqIraq articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
I do understand, that it should be mentioned the improvement of what we do know about this culture, but I think starting the whole article as "in 1870 they thought this and that" is not OK. Yes, in 1870 they didn't know how should the king's name to be read. But d
o we write articles about atomic theory or evolution mentioning flat earth theories immediately? Or in an article regarding the Moon landing, do we have write immediately, that long time ago, people didn't think there is a moon? In the history of the discovery of Akkadian language this mistakes has it's places, but should not be indicated in the first rows of the article. Ilumael (talk) 00:42, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
