The presence of the name of Neit-ikrety in the Turin Canon has generated a number of important discussions in the past but, in a recent re-examination of the Turin Papyrus, K. Ryholt (Ryholt 2000, 87-100) has demonstrated that Fragment 43 - which contains the name of Neit-ikrety - must be raised to a higher position than it occupies at present in Gardiner's publication of the Canon. Rybolt's repositioning has meant that the number of names on the Abydos list for the Sixth Dynasty now coincides exactly with the number of names in the Turin Canon. As a result of this move, it was possible for Ryholt to add yet another isolated fragment of the papyrus next to Fragment 43; this piece contains the phrase, S3-Pt/:t, the 'son of Ptah' (Ryholt 2000, 88). This result has brought Ryholt to two significant conclusions: that the names of Neit-ikrety should now be seen as Neit-ikretyNetjerykara-Sa-Ptah, and that Neit-ikrety was a male king. This article revisits the various arguments, old and new, relating to this controversial identity and offers an independent assessment of the evidence.