Jump to content

Talk:List of bog bodies

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cucumberkvp (talk | contribs) at 18:25, 25 September 2011 (→‎Add These?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hi! I was just working on your list and received an Edit conflict note when storing my edits. Here you will find my comments:

  1. The note on Bockstens Man is only a very crude theroy of an swedish hobby archaeologist and publisher based on a very free interpretation of an supposed artifact on an old photography of the excarvation and which is not accepted by scientists.
  2. The image of the Bunsoh Body only shows a reconstruction of the band found near his neck.
  3. The finds of Dröbnitz Girl and its other finds are completely lost during WW2.
  4. Meenybraddan: "She is famous for being wrapped in a cloak from 500 years after she died." The textile typological dating of the cloak seems to be much younger, but that will not mean that it is younger. But it is most likely that this type of weaft (textile pattern) has been produced and used in her live times. I personally would rely on the 14C dates, as textile typology has uncertainties.
  5. Fredriksdal Man also known as Kragelund Man, Danish Fredriksdalmanden.
  6. Peiting Woman: Take care as the find is presently under scientific investigations and it has been newly dated.
  7. Roum Woman: Unfortunately P.V. Globs book is totally outdated, but it is still a good source. The image on the title page at google books shows the Tollund-Man.

Do you have any literature source for the Auning Woman?

On de:Benutzer:Bullenwächter/Literaturvorlagen you will find a selection of literature on bog bodies in my book shelve.

I have entered a interwikilink on my bog body list to your list.

Now I have to go offline - have a nice day. --Bullenwächter (talk) 18:02, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I have made some edits on your page I hope this is OK. I have also added an interwikilink to my project page for easier navigation if you don't mind. --Bullenwächter (talk) 06:57, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Add These?

Little is found about these bog bodies from the United Kingdom. They no longer remain.

  • Terrydremount woman
  • Mulkeeragh Man

--GouramiWatcher (Gulp) 01:08, 24 June 2011 (UTC) [reply]

There should be no external links in the table at all. External links do not belong in the body of an article. Links to other sites should be used as references as appropriate, as the links then will populate to the refs section. Links to images not on Wikimedia Commons or Wikipedia need to be removed completely.

People who took photos of modern facial reconstructions may have copyrights to their photos, but it is the underlying work's copyright that is important. A number of these types of images are on this page. Unless the reconstruction is so old it is public domain, or if the artist has agreed for it to be used here, then Wikipedia cannot have it here. There may be fair use arguments in some cases, but the one that brought me here was a photographer claiming to own the copyright to the entire image just because he snapped the photo. That's a derivative work, and a copyright violation. DreamGuy (talk) 17:46, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are two issues here. First, the facial reconstruction images: DreamGuy is correct that the photos of modern facial reconstructions are derivative works and therefore remain under copyright to either the sculptor or the museum. I have removed them from this list and tagged them for deletion at Commons per Commons:Derivative works.
Second, the use of external links in the body of an article. This is not prohibited -- although they are not typically used in the body of an article. As mentioned at WP:EL, the {{external media}} template can be used when non-free and non-fair use media cannot be uploaded to Wikipedia. This method is generally used only for exceptional cases. In general, Lists should be developed in a manner consistent with our Wikipedia:Featured list criteria -- for example, List of National Treasures of Japan (sculptures) or List of birds of California demonstrate a discreet use of images. I would suggest the editors take a more judicious approach to the use of images here. CactusWriter (talk) 17:31, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The external links for the images were meant to show people what the bog bodies had looked like, which is not easy to describe. The second reason is because they are unavailable on WP or the commons, and I have some troubles uploading images that are not my own work. I appologize if this is wrong to do, but I felt that they would be very useful for this list. --GouramiWatcher (Gulp) 20:51, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yde Girl.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Yde Girl.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests - No timestamp given
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:06, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]