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
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Assyria, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of
Assyrian-
related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the
project page.AssyriaWikipedia:WikiProject AssyriaTemplate:WikiProject AssyriaAssyrian articles
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 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
The notes given make incomprehensible references to sources (e.g. 'ZA'). Clean-up please from someone?--
Smerus (
talk) 10:15, 5 December 2009 (UTC)reply
What does this mean?
"Examples as Tiglath-Pileser III (reigning over Babylon as "Pulu") and his son Shalmaneser V (reigning over Babylon as "Ululayu") are not based on authentic and official evidence"
I don't understand what the article is saying, and to the extent that I do understand, it seems to contradict my previous understanding which is, indeed, that Tiglath-Pileser III reigned over Babylon as "Pulu" and Shalmaneser V did so as "Ululayu." If that's not true, why is that a thing people say? The article is elliptical and confusing.
john k (
talk) 02:06, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Although they are often said to have been, there is no contemporary hard evidence that "Pulu" and "Ululayu" were used as regnal names.
Ichthyovenator (
talk) 12:54, 19 July 2020 (UTC)reply
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
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Assyria, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of
Assyrian-
related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the
project page.AssyriaWikipedia:WikiProject AssyriaTemplate:WikiProject AssyriaAssyrian articles
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 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
The notes given make incomprehensible references to sources (e.g. 'ZA'). Clean-up please from someone?--
Smerus (
talk) 10:15, 5 December 2009 (UTC)reply
What does this mean?
"Examples as Tiglath-Pileser III (reigning over Babylon as "Pulu") and his son Shalmaneser V (reigning over Babylon as "Ululayu") are not based on authentic and official evidence"
I don't understand what the article is saying, and to the extent that I do understand, it seems to contradict my previous understanding which is, indeed, that Tiglath-Pileser III reigned over Babylon as "Pulu" and Shalmaneser V did so as "Ululayu." If that's not true, why is that a thing people say? The article is elliptical and confusing.
john k (
talk) 02:06, 20 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Although they are often said to have been, there is no contemporary hard evidence that "Pulu" and "Ululayu" were used as regnal names.
Ichthyovenator (
talk) 12:54, 19 July 2020 (UTC)reply