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

Ancient Near East Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Mythology Low‑importance This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Iraq Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Religion Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Arab world Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world 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.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Books This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

A fact from Song of the hoe appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 22 June 2011 ( check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that the Song of the Hoe, a Sumerian creation myth, describes the construction projects of the Sumerian gods at the beginning of the universe? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2011/June.

There are four pictures included in this article, and three of them are poorly used.

1. The hoes in the first picture have a caption that states that they are similar to the ones in the text. You cannot use hoes from America to illustrate hoes from Mesopotamia unless you justify the use of that picture in your caption. So say how the hoes are similar, and say how they are different. i.e. "Stones hoes were widely produced. These come from America, date (????BCE)"
2. The second caption is ridiculous! These Chinese wooden hoes do NOT represent the hoes after creation. If the picture is used, then the caption must state what they actually are.
3. Why are there two similar picture of a modern hoe, (probably the same hoe) when one picture of this simple implement is quite enough?

Amandajm ( talk) 03:55, 22 June 2011 (UTC) reply

• I hope to have addressed your concerns with an improvement in the caption text. The excessive use of hoe images remains for satirical effect. I suggest our ancestors were attempting humour in their song, and that they would have been pleased to have it passed on in a similar form in this article. Let me know if you think I'm over-"hoe"-ing it. Cheers. Paul Bedson ❉ talk❉ 23:20, 22 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Well, you must look and think before you write a caption! How can three hoes of entirely different shape, obviously hand crafted, in what appears to be a museum display, (dead blowfly and all), possibly be described as "modern" and "mass-produced"?

Having the same modern hoe (or any two modern hoes) represented twice is too much. The humour will almost certainly be lost, in an encyclopedic article. Amandajm ( talk) 05:27, 23 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Okay, thanks for that, I was trying to make too many corrections last night too quickly. I see your point and have no objection if one of the hoes has to go. Paul Bedson ❉ talk❉ 07:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC) reply

I'm sorry. I sound rather rude! Amandajm ( talk) 09:28, 23 June 2011 (UTC) reply