Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Archaeology

MainDiscussionMonitoringOutlineParticipantsProject organizationAssessmentResourcesShowcase

Archaeology and the Book of Mormon

This needs cleaning up, it's being rewritten from an LDS perspective. Doug Weller talk 16:45, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Graham Hancock's new book America Before may impact our articles

Jason Colavito has a column [http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/graham-hancock-to-archaeologists-you-guys-are-the-pseudoscientists Graham Hancock to Archaeologists: "You Guys Are the Pseudoscientists"].

Jason says "With the publication of America Before this week, Graham Hancock has launched a major publicity push, larger than the one accompanying Magicians of the Gods four years ago and rivaling his media ubiquity in the late 1990s. According to his U.S. publisher, St. Martin’s, the American part of his marketing campaign will include an initial print run of 125,000 copies, a fourteen-city national book tour, a national media tour, a marketing campaign aimed at scholars and college instructors (!), a featured-title selection at TheHistoryReader.com, and “extensive history blog outreach.” They even offer mail-in prizes, giving early buyers an enamel lapel pin of the book’s logo." See also this. Doug Weller talk 18:42, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Should List of megalithic sites redirect to List of monoliths?

We also have Monolith and Megalith. Doug Weller talk 18:44, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Definitely not. It should be roughly overlapping with Category:Megalithic monuments. But, it's not really a big deal? PatHadley (talk) 20:17, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

LMLK Research website as a source for biblical archaeology - run by a Creationist with a B.Sc.

See WP:RSN#LMLK Research website as a source for biblical archaeology - run by a Creationist with a B.Sc.. Doug Weller talk 14:57, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Unpleasant attack on an anthropology Professor at WP:BLPN#Rand Flem-Ath

This all started when John Hoopes wrote a negative review on Amazon about a book by Flem-Ath in 2001. He deleted it (accusations by Flem-Ath that he was disciplined are totally false) and since then Flem-Ath has been unhappy, to say the least, and when a student of Hoopes started a draft article he objected dramatically. I think the posts at Talk:Rand Flem-Ath by Flem-Ath are, funnily enough as Flem-Ath is at BLPN, BLP violations. Doug Weller talk 09:29, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

A possible Science/STEM User Group

There's a discussion about a possible User Group for STEM over at Meta:Talk:STEM_Wiki_User_Group. The idea would be to help coordinate, collaborate and network cross-subject, cross-wiki and cross-language to share experience and resources that may be valuable to the relevant wikiprojects. Current discussion includes preferred scope and structure. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 02:55, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

RM discussion on Jericho (Tell es-Sultan)

Please comment: Talk:Tell es-Sultan.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 14:38, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

A proposal for WikiJournals to become a new sister project

Over the last few years, the WikiJournal User Group has been building and testing a set of peer reviewed academic journals on a mediawiki platform. The main types of articles are:

• Existing Wikipedia articles submitted for external review and feedback (example)
• From-scratch articles that, after review, are imported to Wikipedia (example)
• Original research articles that are not imported to Wikipedia (example)

Proposal: WikiJournals as a new sister project

From a Wikipedian point of view, this is a complementary system to Featured article review, but bridging the gap with external experts, implementing established scholarly practices, and generating citable, doi-linked publications.

Please take a look and support/oppose/comment! T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 11:28, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Civilizations for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Civilizations is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Civilizations until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:20, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Archaelogical reports

Do you have a specific citation template, or do we use {{cite journal}}? Or anything else of course. Cheers, ——SerialNumber54129 15:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

@Serial Number 54129: What do you mean by archaeological reports? Something not published in a journal? – Joe (talk) 20:31, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for looking in Joe Roe; yes, I think so. It's this, which I'm currently using on Littlemore Priory scandals. It's not in a journal, so omits various parameters, but was a report to the council, so it doesn't really fit {{cite journal}} but I couldn't find anyting closer. Any suggestions? Cheers, ——SerialNumber54129 20:57, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

@Serial Number 54129: Ah I see. Yes, these are unpublished grey literature so {{cite journal}} doesn't quite fit. {{cite report}} or {{cite techreport}} maybe?

The ADS indexes archaeological grey lit from the UK and gives them DOIs (e.g. Minchery Farm). It might be worth creating a {{cite ads}} template and/or adding ADS/OASIS ids to the citation templates. – Joe (talk) 21:11, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

NPOV issue over possible megalithic observatory at Carahunge

New editor who doesn't understand NPOV and is using a source which discusses both sides of a dispute but only mentions the pro-observatory side. See thsir talk page[1] where I tried to explain the issue, WP:FTN#Carahunge and Paris Herouni (the editor seems more interested in Harouni than Carahunge I think) and after I pinged them there they started WP:NPOVN#Carahunge. The source I was concerned about can be downloaded. Different issue, he's suggesting some new sources pro-observatory - I'm not convinced about them all, and I believe that there are issues of nationalism in Armenian archaeology - I could be wrong of course with that. One source is a collection of papers, " Cosmic catastrophes. Center for Cultural History and Folkloristics and Tartu Observatory," which doesn't look peer reviewed. @SteveMcCluskey: Doug Weller talk 05:20, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject X Newsletter • Issue 14

Newsletter • June 2019

Updates: I've been focusing largely on the development side of things, so we are a lot closer now to being ready to actually start discussing deploying it and testing it out here.

There's just a few things left that need to be resolved:

• A bunch of language support issues in particular, plus some other release blockers, such as the fact that currently there's no good way to find any hubs people do create.
• We also probably need some proper documentation and examples up to even reference if we want a meaningful discussion. We have the extension documentation and some test projects, but we probably need a bit more. Also I need to be able to even find the test projects! How can I possibly write reports about this stuff if I can't find any of it?!

Some other stuff that's happened in the meantime:

• Midpoint report is out for this round of the project, if you want to read in too much detail about all the problems I've been running into.
• WikiProject Molecular Biology have successfully set up using the old module system that CollaborationKit is intended to replace (eventually), and it even seems to work, so go them. Based on the issues they ran into, it looks like the members signup thing on that system has some of the same problems as we've been unable to resolve in CK, though, which is... interesting. (Need to change the content model to the right thing for the formwizard config to take. Ugh, content models.)

Until next time,

-— Isarra ༆ 21:43, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

‎Request for input on re-draft of an article

Hello all, I've redrafted the article on slighting in my sandbox and wondered if I could get some input on it. I'd like to copy it over to mainspace but since I've written one of the sources used I'd like to try and establish some sort of consensus first. For those of you who haven't come across the term before, it's about the deliberate destruction of buildings – especially fortifications. If you have any comments, I reckon Talk:Slighting would be a good place for them; I'll create a new section there shortly. Richard Nevell (talk) 22:23, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Nice write-up:-) ∯WBG^converse 15:10, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Commented on talk there, but fine for mainspace. Johnbod (talk) 15:36, 24 June 2019 (UTC)