Talk:Nefertiti Bust

Nefertiti bust (pictured) was reinstated in Neues Museum in 2009 after 70 years away, including a period in a salt mine in World War II?
	Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 6, 2018, December 6, 2019, and December 6, 2023.

This  level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Ancient Egypt Top‑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 Top This article has been rated as Top-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. Archaeology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology 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.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Germany Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Sculpture This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sculpture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sculpture 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.SculptureWikipedia:WikiProject SculptureTemplate:WikiProject Sculpturesculpture articles Visual arts This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles Women This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

It says "When the bust was first discovered, no piece of quartz to represent the iris of the left eyeball was present, as in the other eye, and none was found despite an intensive search and a then significant reward of £5 being put up for information regarding its whereabouts.[29]" £5 doesn't seem a "significant" reward. Maybe the £5 is a typo? There is no way to check on the link provided. Anyone can provide another source? Maybe should remove the word significant? Using http://inflation.stephenmorley.org/ to calculate £5 from 1912 to current rate is says it is £530, which still doesn't sound "significant" for a historic quartz. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:140:8000:D84F:7DD9:A689:3C50:ACB9 (talk) 22:51, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The "£5" are probably

Egyptian Pounds and in 1912 £5 would have been a considerable sum for the average Egyptian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.53.137 (talk) 09:53, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

There is a lot on the history, but little on the art history here. Johnbod (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have been away from the article for some time, but I notice that my comment above was picked up, but not followed up, in the GA review. Just to be clear, the article still has virtually nothing on the role and context of the bust within Egyptian royal portraiture, which is indeed very much the focus of its current excellent presentation in Berlin, and which I would expect to take up a large part of a good article on the subject. I don't think the article meets GA standards in its current state for this reason. Johnbod (talk) 18:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The exact role and context of the bust within Egyptian royal portraiture is unknown. "The exact function of the bust is unknown, though it is theorized that the bust may be a sculptor's model."--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 12:22, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is not the same thing at all! Johnbod (talk) 13:28, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please show a sample para discussing the issue in another article/webpage so I can understand what you really want to see in the article? --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are writing an article on a single artwork from a rather distant culture, but have no art historical material on the lengthy and much-discussed artistic tradition from which the object comes, which should be a major element of the article. You don't even link to our

Portraiture in Ancient Egypt, which is not a bad place to start (not that they seem to link here either). Other stuff quickly found online is here and here. No doubt there is plenty more. That the sculpture was a reference model for use in the studio seems fairly generally assumed, and might be stated more strongly. Johnbod (talk) 14:03, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

please explain WHY the statue was made in the this section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.198.227 (talk) 03:37, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Although the translation (German Oriental Company/Society) is right, the institution (Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft (DMG)) is not correct. It was the Deutsche Orient-Gesellschaft (DOG), of which one of the founders was James Simon himself, the lone sponsor of the Amarna excavation in 1912/13. The DOG was established in Berlin, as the DMG was in Leipzig. The DOG is still in Berlin.

You may find some more information about the DOG here:

• Deutsche Orient-Gesellschaft e.V.
• German Wikipedia: Deutsche Orient Gesellschaft

--Sat Ra (talk) 09:38, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Background is a brief paragraph about who Nefertiti was. It was added so that the reader need not claim on the Nefertiti link. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 12:47, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't removed intentionally. It was added during an edit conflict, and replaced afterwards. I'm all for a little context.

Yomangani^talk 13:08, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

There is confusion when the bust was first displayed, some sources say 1923, some 1924. 1924 is now used in the article. I am confused. Some someone find reliable references? --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:16, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This may be a reliable reference about the first display of the bust:

• see page 286 and note 24: The bust was presented to the public in Borchardt’s text on the Nefertiti portrait, dated 1923 but published in 1924, as well as through the exhibition of the bust beginning in March; see Krauss, ‚1913-1988, p. 100
• see also http://www.museum.de/p/p_magazin/magazin.pdf ; pages 6-7: „Die Schöne“ wurde ab 1924 im Neuen Museum der Öffentlichkeit präsentiert. („The beauty was presented to the public in the Neues Museum in 1924.)

I hope, this helps. A footnote could be added to explain the two dates. --Sat Ra (talk) 09:59, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P. S. I am sorry, I failed to receive the work of Krauss to which is referred to so many times. While I am still working on the German version I will keep a steady eye on this important thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sat Ra (talk • contribs) 09:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. incorporated in the text. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:18, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any photos of this that could be added? I think it would really add to the article to demonstate how it was displayed in this.RafikiSykes (talk) 05:22, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can see a photo here. Getting copyright permission for a photo and "fair use" for this page would be rather difficult I'm afraid. Paul B (talk) 11:44, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that

Picture of the day

The

repatriation.Photo: Philip Pikart

Archive – More featured pictures...