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.
The sentence While these disputes may seem trivial, they reflect differences in the approach and perception of the same material is unsatisfactorily inconclusive. It should open some discussion of the variously-weighted approaches in zooarchaeology, which would provide the meat of this article.--Wetman (talk) 19:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
This entry makes no reference whatsoever to the term Archaeozoology, which as the term used by most the external links and half of Europe for this particular discipline, is potentially rather remiss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 01:16, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
The definition is too broad: This is more like a definition of paleozoology. Zooarchaeology/archaeozoology deals with animals in relationship to human cultures of the past as studied by archaeologists. One might also say that the definition is too narrow [!], since it seems to focus on just the remains, whereas the field considers their impact etc.
The list of what is looked at is too restricted Representations of animals and coprolites are also studied. Kdammers (talk) 10:46, 8 May 2012 (UTC)