 |
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. |
|
 B |
This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| High |
This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
|
|
[edit] New article?
I am an evolutionary microbiologist and for some reason in the past few years the number of people futilely attempting to convince me why evolution is wrong has increased. However, Irriated from having been found to be a tad ignorant on the front of carbon dating, I read it up here — nice article by the way —: I think a respectable fraction of the 1,000+ daily viewers must read it too to find the flaws in either side of this annoyingly fatuous argument. Maybe a separate article for the controversy may be good — keeping that logical/ubiased may be tricky, but it would divert attention. If it is any consolation, a small article about a kingdom in an obsolete classification system of bacteria called Monera just keeps getting POV vandalisms... --122.62.144.13 (talk) 11:40, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Archiving is too frequent
I think it should be more than 90 days. 6 months or 12 would be better. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 07:45, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Maybe I was a bit hasty - was mainly going for archiving threads where discussions seemed closed. I note guidelines says archive at 50 kb and this page was only half-way there. Babakathy (talk) 09:02, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Editing the code on this page for the bot to arhive less frequently simple, but is it suggested that some material I archived should be de-arhived? (Have no objection to this). Babakathy (talk) 13:12, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
