This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Ur article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2021 and 7 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): SCoy4542.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 September 2021 and 7 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ES875.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
"The Kasidim could also refer to the Kassites who were present during the time during which the Exodus occured." Has any historian or archaeologist made this connection? Or is it 19th-century Bible-talk? A source or reference for this would make it more encyclopediable, though a religious website would not be very helpful. Anything? -- Wetman 13:26, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I think its great someone cared to edit this entry. I specified tried to write it in 3rd person so others could modify it (especially for grammar). I also largely avoided to make personal opinions, but tried to only report what I saw. I think the latest edit of it, is great, but I also think it has lost some references and some of it is actually not true anymore.
I'm not sure if I should just edit, since I am the original writer of it and it may get the impression that i'm bias and just want my version. Twthmoses 00:11, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Corrected mistake showing Nabonidus as the last king of Babylon in 639 BC. Changed it to 539 BC. -- Mkofron 09:05 UTC 4/28/05
I hope that everyone can detect the rhetorical sleight-of-hand in which a quote from Genesis is made to look more historical in the following:
This is not in fact how Ur is described in the Genesis quotes, which are alluded to but not actually exhibited. This is a very familiar technique, which everyone should be aware of. I've left it untouched in the text as a characteristic example. Anyone may edit it out if they like, of course -- Wetman 04:30, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
just to clarifie something, is this the old testiment from the many many times retranlated modern bible or the original jewish texts, im not being sinicle or anything but the wording of the original texts may well suport the quotation. im no expert but is there anyone who has read less recent translations of the old testiment to see if this is so? just a thaught. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.82.218.163 ( talk) 14:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Great Soviet Encyclopedia has a label 'reconstruction' under the drawing of this ziggurat. It should be cleared out whether it is ancient building or modern reconstruction Ilya K 18:54, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'm afraid that clicking on the coordinates returns an 'out of range' error.
I changed the coordinates to the required deg / min format and set them to center on the Ziggurat. User:David.c.h 10 October 2005
Ur means "city' in Sumerian.
But, I 'll suggest an other etymology.
Ur, Ur-uk, Sur-rupak, Er-idu, (Plus compare: greek name "Er-ytra sea" = modern Persian Gulf). What's happen?
Is it possible that these cities may found, in the ante-deluvian era (i.e. 4th or 5th millennium B.C.), by some proto-Hurrians (a hemi-indoeuropean but not semitic people)?
-- IonnKorr 21:08, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
This has been put back although the info is in the Ur Kasdim article. Does it really belong here seeing that as is explained in the Ur Kasdim article, it is not known with certainty that Sumerian Ur was Ur Kasdim, its simply the most favoured conjecture? Kuratowski's Ghost 14:11, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
In the section “Identification with Biblical Ur,” I read “The Chaldeans .... but were not the rulers of Ur until the late 7th century BC, around 550 BC.” In fact, 550 BC is in the sixth century BC. Which is correct? Or is something missing here? Walter Turner 91.54.105.102 ( talk) 09:31, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Can somebody explain to me the "rumor" about Tallil Airbase overseeing Ur? Maybe I am not reading the entry right, but Tallil is a stone throw away from Ur. You can see this by using Google Maps, Earth or any other mapping software. Now, if the meaning is that Tallil Aribase is conducting surveillance of the site? That's not a rumor either. Ur falls under the area of operations/interest for that particular base. Surveillance of nearby sites is not suspected, it is expected. user:jerry.mills
The city is named as 'Urima' in Sumerian cuneiform, and 'Uriwa' in Akkadian cuneiform. No inscriptions have been found naming this city as being "of the Chaldeans". Abraham's 'Ur', which is related to the word in Hebrew for 'fire' or 'light', not 'city', should be searched for in the area which the Bible says is his 'land of nativity', Aram Naharayim, i.e. northern Mesopotamia...not the Biblical Shinar, i.e. Sumer
Just removed information about rumors that Talil AB is watching the site. It is not a rumor. - Jerry.mills 05:16, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
The "All About Archeology" site has a little bit of information about Ur. However, the site is not particularly about archeology -- it's a proselytizing site. I haven't looked closely at the site, but I would be shocked if the site mentioned anything that disagreed with (their interpretation of) the Bible. Should the site be listed as a reference? Chip Unicorn 17:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
The text "Ur at its height had around 30,000 residents' has been deleted by someone. Perhaps a better estimate could be quoted. -- Wetman 02:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
The article should be updated: "Fly into the American air base of Tallil outside Nasiriya in central Iraq and the flight path is over the great ziggurat of Ur, reputedly the earliest city on earth. Seen from the base in the desert haze or the sand-filled gloom of dusk, the structure is indistinguishable from the mounds of fuel dumps, stores and hangars. Ur is safe within the base compound. But its walls are pockmarked with wartime shrapnel and a blockhouse is being built over an adjacent archaeological site. When the head of Iraq's supposedly sovereign board of antiquities and heritage, Abbas al-Hussaini, tried to inspect the site recently, the Americans refused him access to his own most important monument." ( Simon Jenkins in The Guardian, June 8, 2007). -- Ghirla -трёп- 06:50, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I deleted this hoax
As of May the area of the ziggurat is entirely closed off to the public because of the recent discovery of the giant human skeleton found. Nobody at all has access to this area, including personnel from nearby Camp Adder. The owners of this area have hired famed archaeologists to find out more of these remains —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.68.125 ( talk) 19:45, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Looking at the history, I doubt the cuneiform rendering of the name was ever even close to being correct (it should be hex code points, instead of just 'x') and I think it should be removed until someone with knowledge can add it back in correctly. (I know the mechanism but I don't know the correct characters and I refuse to guess.) -- chbarts ( talk) 07:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
I have given the spelling according to the ETCSL, which is generally a good source. -- dab (𒁳) 14:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
This seems entirely too chatty, Wiki-Travelish, unencyclopedic and blogish IMO. I think it should be drastically modified and much of it deleted. What's left should go into a site description. We really should not care whether we can visit the site or not. I expect a site on the moon or at the Antarctic or in Orlando, to be equally and logically described without a lot of touristy info. Student7 ( talk) 03:14, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
This needs a lead-in explanatory sentence which maybe the footnote has already. Presumably the US Army was there as a result of the war in 2003. Why did they remain? To protect the ruins? Student7 ( talk) 00:21, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that all information on Ur's historical background has been removed. What gives? Where did all that info go?
It is undisputed that the name was written with the sign URI2=URIM2. This doesn't tell us anything about pronunciation in either Sumerian or Akkadian. If you want to argue that the Akkadian pronunciation was uri, you should present references to that effect, not references that point out that it is spelled URI2. Your statement "the cuneiform name of Ur was Urim in both Sumerian and Akkadian" doesn't even begin to make sense. Did you even read the reference cited? It says that Sumerian Urum or Urim was interpreted as mimated nominal form in Akkadian, which left Uru as the Semitic nominative. This has nothing to do with Sumerian uru "city", it is a stem Ur- with a Semitic nominative Uru. -- dab (𒁳) 15:36, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Any user here have any knowledge/idea that the most common term for a small town in south Indian languages (has same pronunciation as Ur), Ooru came from (or any connection with) Ur ? Peopledowhattheyoughttodo ( talk) 16:42, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
I am a muslim living in Turkiye. We have a city named "Şanlı(glorious) Urfa" here in south-east region of the country. I believe those "Islamic Texts" referred on the -Ur in Islamic tradition- paragraph, tells of the prophet Ibrahim (Abraham) was thrown into fire this city of Urfa in Turkiye, not in the city of UR in Iraq. I travelled to Urfa and saw the pond which the locals call "Balıklıgöl" (rougly translated as 'Lake with the fish')- or Lake Aynzeliha , which they believe the fire the prophet Ibrahim (Abraham) was thrown into , turned into water and firewood into fish, so it became "Balıklıgöl" pond.Also King Nimrod was the king of this city of Urfa in ancient times. You can read the legend from city's official site [ | here]. So I think the reference in the article is not accurate and research on the matter is needed. Sumerian city of UR probably has nothing to do with the prophet Ibrahim (Abraham) and King Nimrod legend. -- Fotte ( talk) 11:49, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Shouldn't a reference like this be added? "Ecologically, the agricultural productivity of the Sumerian lands was being compromised as a result of rising salinity. The evaporation of irrigated waters left dissolved salts in the soil, making it increasingly difficult to sustain agriculture. There was a major depopulation of southern Mesopotamia, affecting many of the smaller sites, from about 2000 B.C.E., leading to the collapse of Sumerian culture." This is simply from the "History/Sumerian Renaissance" section of the New World Encyclopeida. WLohe ( talk) 17:01, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
According to the short chronology page "most recent work has essentially disproved the short chronology". If that's so why is it used here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.95.197.121 ( talk) 18:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Ur. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:02, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
@ Tajotep:
the introduction showed large red letter type - error at line 361 (if I recall accurately) - (and taking into account the unlikely fact of my having hallucinated this fact, since I couldn't attribute the edit by the previous user to the error observable on the page) - I viewed the diff page afterwards and couldn't see the red-type, obviously I'm concluding the versions page indicates the actual text and error information is an over-lay outside of the functioning of the versions (hoping this makes sense in any case). 23h112e ( talk) 21:30, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
I.D. | I am a Talk: Ur |
23h112e ( talk) 16:23, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
The article has a UNESCO World Heritage Site tag in the infobox, but none of the actual World Heritage articles list Ur as a confirmed site, it just appears to have been nominated and evaluated along with neighbouring locations. The tag seems a bit misleading. 81.227.48.127 ( talk) 21:34, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
Mostly on a formatting note, but I feel like the section on Music should either be fleshed out to include more about the Lyres of Ur, or merged with the section on society and culture with a hyperlink to that specific article. still a little unwilling to edit things, so just wanted to pop this up here before doing anything. Lperkins5825 ( talk) 22:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
I added some additional information about the Royal tombs and Great death pits that Woolley discovered. Also, I added a photo of a headdress found in the tomb of Puabi from the British Museum. SCoy4542 ( talk) 20:57, 23 March 2021 (UTC)SCoy4542
It looks like a some point someone cargo-culted a chunk about the Woooley excavation over from another web site and stuck it in the Archaeology section. Then with the passage of time it has kind of blended together with what was already there. Hopefully someone with better writing skills then I have can sort it out someday, at least cut down on the duplication. Ploversegg ( talk) 20:46, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
There's a picture captioned "Enthroned King Ur-Nammu (c. 2047–2030 BC)" without any additional context either with the picture or in the article. Maybe the article can have an explanation of what this image is about. 57.135.233.22 ( talk) 20:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Article states (read today 06/07/2024) "When Ur was founded, the Persian Gulf's water level was two-and-a-half metres higher than today." WOW this suggests just the opposite of current theory of global warming - sea's in biblical times were presumably MUCH HIGHER then vs. current day. Soil salinity and associated fertility was also referenced in other discussions. Either there was much higher global warmth at the time, or else the landmass rose a lot during the period. More research needed IMO. 2600:6C48:7006:200:5C10:C716:750B:C3B2 ( talk) 23:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Ur article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2021 and 7 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): SCoy4542.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 September 2021 and 7 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ES875.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
"The Kasidim could also refer to the Kassites who were present during the time during which the Exodus occured." Has any historian or archaeologist made this connection? Or is it 19th-century Bible-talk? A source or reference for this would make it more encyclopediable, though a religious website would not be very helpful. Anything? -- Wetman 13:26, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I think its great someone cared to edit this entry. I specified tried to write it in 3rd person so others could modify it (especially for grammar). I also largely avoided to make personal opinions, but tried to only report what I saw. I think the latest edit of it, is great, but I also think it has lost some references and some of it is actually not true anymore.
I'm not sure if I should just edit, since I am the original writer of it and it may get the impression that i'm bias and just want my version. Twthmoses 00:11, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Corrected mistake showing Nabonidus as the last king of Babylon in 639 BC. Changed it to 539 BC. -- Mkofron 09:05 UTC 4/28/05
I hope that everyone can detect the rhetorical sleight-of-hand in which a quote from Genesis is made to look more historical in the following:
This is not in fact how Ur is described in the Genesis quotes, which are alluded to but not actually exhibited. This is a very familiar technique, which everyone should be aware of. I've left it untouched in the text as a characteristic example. Anyone may edit it out if they like, of course -- Wetman 04:30, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
just to clarifie something, is this the old testiment from the many many times retranlated modern bible or the original jewish texts, im not being sinicle or anything but the wording of the original texts may well suport the quotation. im no expert but is there anyone who has read less recent translations of the old testiment to see if this is so? just a thaught. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.82.218.163 ( talk) 14:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Great Soviet Encyclopedia has a label 'reconstruction' under the drawing of this ziggurat. It should be cleared out whether it is ancient building or modern reconstruction Ilya K 18:54, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'm afraid that clicking on the coordinates returns an 'out of range' error.
I changed the coordinates to the required deg / min format and set them to center on the Ziggurat. User:David.c.h 10 October 2005
Ur means "city' in Sumerian.
But, I 'll suggest an other etymology.
Ur, Ur-uk, Sur-rupak, Er-idu, (Plus compare: greek name "Er-ytra sea" = modern Persian Gulf). What's happen?
Is it possible that these cities may found, in the ante-deluvian era (i.e. 4th or 5th millennium B.C.), by some proto-Hurrians (a hemi-indoeuropean but not semitic people)?
-- IonnKorr 21:08, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
This has been put back although the info is in the Ur Kasdim article. Does it really belong here seeing that as is explained in the Ur Kasdim article, it is not known with certainty that Sumerian Ur was Ur Kasdim, its simply the most favoured conjecture? Kuratowski's Ghost 14:11, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
In the section “Identification with Biblical Ur,” I read “The Chaldeans .... but were not the rulers of Ur until the late 7th century BC, around 550 BC.” In fact, 550 BC is in the sixth century BC. Which is correct? Or is something missing here? Walter Turner 91.54.105.102 ( talk) 09:31, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Can somebody explain to me the "rumor" about Tallil Airbase overseeing Ur? Maybe I am not reading the entry right, but Tallil is a stone throw away from Ur. You can see this by using Google Maps, Earth or any other mapping software. Now, if the meaning is that Tallil Aribase is conducting surveillance of the site? That's not a rumor either. Ur falls under the area of operations/interest for that particular base. Surveillance of nearby sites is not suspected, it is expected. user:jerry.mills
The city is named as 'Urima' in Sumerian cuneiform, and 'Uriwa' in Akkadian cuneiform. No inscriptions have been found naming this city as being "of the Chaldeans". Abraham's 'Ur', which is related to the word in Hebrew for 'fire' or 'light', not 'city', should be searched for in the area which the Bible says is his 'land of nativity', Aram Naharayim, i.e. northern Mesopotamia...not the Biblical Shinar, i.e. Sumer
Just removed information about rumors that Talil AB is watching the site. It is not a rumor. - Jerry.mills 05:16, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
The "All About Archeology" site has a little bit of information about Ur. However, the site is not particularly about archeology -- it's a proselytizing site. I haven't looked closely at the site, but I would be shocked if the site mentioned anything that disagreed with (their interpretation of) the Bible. Should the site be listed as a reference? Chip Unicorn 17:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
The text "Ur at its height had around 30,000 residents' has been deleted by someone. Perhaps a better estimate could be quoted. -- Wetman 02:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
The article should be updated: "Fly into the American air base of Tallil outside Nasiriya in central Iraq and the flight path is over the great ziggurat of Ur, reputedly the earliest city on earth. Seen from the base in the desert haze or the sand-filled gloom of dusk, the structure is indistinguishable from the mounds of fuel dumps, stores and hangars. Ur is safe within the base compound. But its walls are pockmarked with wartime shrapnel and a blockhouse is being built over an adjacent archaeological site. When the head of Iraq's supposedly sovereign board of antiquities and heritage, Abbas al-Hussaini, tried to inspect the site recently, the Americans refused him access to his own most important monument." ( Simon Jenkins in The Guardian, June 8, 2007). -- Ghirla -трёп- 06:50, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I deleted this hoax
As of May the area of the ziggurat is entirely closed off to the public because of the recent discovery of the giant human skeleton found. Nobody at all has access to this area, including personnel from nearby Camp Adder. The owners of this area have hired famed archaeologists to find out more of these remains —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.68.125 ( talk) 19:45, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Looking at the history, I doubt the cuneiform rendering of the name was ever even close to being correct (it should be hex code points, instead of just 'x') and I think it should be removed until someone with knowledge can add it back in correctly. (I know the mechanism but I don't know the correct characters and I refuse to guess.) -- chbarts ( talk) 07:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
I have given the spelling according to the ETCSL, which is generally a good source. -- dab (𒁳) 14:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
This seems entirely too chatty, Wiki-Travelish, unencyclopedic and blogish IMO. I think it should be drastically modified and much of it deleted. What's left should go into a site description. We really should not care whether we can visit the site or not. I expect a site on the moon or at the Antarctic or in Orlando, to be equally and logically described without a lot of touristy info. Student7 ( talk) 03:14, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
This needs a lead-in explanatory sentence which maybe the footnote has already. Presumably the US Army was there as a result of the war in 2003. Why did they remain? To protect the ruins? Student7 ( talk) 00:21, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that all information on Ur's historical background has been removed. What gives? Where did all that info go?
It is undisputed that the name was written with the sign URI2=URIM2. This doesn't tell us anything about pronunciation in either Sumerian or Akkadian. If you want to argue that the Akkadian pronunciation was uri, you should present references to that effect, not references that point out that it is spelled URI2. Your statement "the cuneiform name of Ur was Urim in both Sumerian and Akkadian" doesn't even begin to make sense. Did you even read the reference cited? It says that Sumerian Urum or Urim was interpreted as mimated nominal form in Akkadian, which left Uru as the Semitic nominative. This has nothing to do with Sumerian uru "city", it is a stem Ur- with a Semitic nominative Uru. -- dab (𒁳) 15:36, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Any user here have any knowledge/idea that the most common term for a small town in south Indian languages (has same pronunciation as Ur), Ooru came from (or any connection with) Ur ? Peopledowhattheyoughttodo ( talk) 16:42, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
I am a muslim living in Turkiye. We have a city named "Şanlı(glorious) Urfa" here in south-east region of the country. I believe those "Islamic Texts" referred on the -Ur in Islamic tradition- paragraph, tells of the prophet Ibrahim (Abraham) was thrown into fire this city of Urfa in Turkiye, not in the city of UR in Iraq. I travelled to Urfa and saw the pond which the locals call "Balıklıgöl" (rougly translated as 'Lake with the fish')- or Lake Aynzeliha , which they believe the fire the prophet Ibrahim (Abraham) was thrown into , turned into water and firewood into fish, so it became "Balıklıgöl" pond.Also King Nimrod was the king of this city of Urfa in ancient times. You can read the legend from city's official site [ | here]. So I think the reference in the article is not accurate and research on the matter is needed. Sumerian city of UR probably has nothing to do with the prophet Ibrahim (Abraham) and King Nimrod legend. -- Fotte ( talk) 11:49, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Shouldn't a reference like this be added? "Ecologically, the agricultural productivity of the Sumerian lands was being compromised as a result of rising salinity. The evaporation of irrigated waters left dissolved salts in the soil, making it increasingly difficult to sustain agriculture. There was a major depopulation of southern Mesopotamia, affecting many of the smaller sites, from about 2000 B.C.E., leading to the collapse of Sumerian culture." This is simply from the "History/Sumerian Renaissance" section of the New World Encyclopeida. WLohe ( talk) 17:01, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
According to the short chronology page "most recent work has essentially disproved the short chronology". If that's so why is it used here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.95.197.121 ( talk) 18:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Ur. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:02, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
@ Tajotep:
the introduction showed large red letter type - error at line 361 (if I recall accurately) - (and taking into account the unlikely fact of my having hallucinated this fact, since I couldn't attribute the edit by the previous user to the error observable on the page) - I viewed the diff page afterwards and couldn't see the red-type, obviously I'm concluding the versions page indicates the actual text and error information is an over-lay outside of the functioning of the versions (hoping this makes sense in any case). 23h112e ( talk) 21:30, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
I.D. | I am a Talk: Ur |
23h112e ( talk) 16:23, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
The article has a UNESCO World Heritage Site tag in the infobox, but none of the actual World Heritage articles list Ur as a confirmed site, it just appears to have been nominated and evaluated along with neighbouring locations. The tag seems a bit misleading. 81.227.48.127 ( talk) 21:34, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
Mostly on a formatting note, but I feel like the section on Music should either be fleshed out to include more about the Lyres of Ur, or merged with the section on society and culture with a hyperlink to that specific article. still a little unwilling to edit things, so just wanted to pop this up here before doing anything. Lperkins5825 ( talk) 22:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
I added some additional information about the Royal tombs and Great death pits that Woolley discovered. Also, I added a photo of a headdress found in the tomb of Puabi from the British Museum. SCoy4542 ( talk) 20:57, 23 March 2021 (UTC)SCoy4542
It looks like a some point someone cargo-culted a chunk about the Woooley excavation over from another web site and stuck it in the Archaeology section. Then with the passage of time it has kind of blended together with what was already there. Hopefully someone with better writing skills then I have can sort it out someday, at least cut down on the duplication. Ploversegg ( talk) 20:46, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
There's a picture captioned "Enthroned King Ur-Nammu (c. 2047–2030 BC)" without any additional context either with the picture or in the article. Maybe the article can have an explanation of what this image is about. 57.135.233.22 ( talk) 20:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Article states (read today 06/07/2024) "When Ur was founded, the Persian Gulf's water level was two-and-a-half metres higher than today." WOW this suggests just the opposite of current theory of global warming - sea's in biblical times were presumably MUCH HIGHER then vs. current day. Soil salinity and associated fertility was also referenced in other discussions. Either there was much higher global warmth at the time, or else the landmass rose a lot during the period. More research needed IMO. 2600:6C48:7006:200:5C10:C716:750B:C3B2 ( talk) 23:00, 8 June 2024 (UTC)