From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Archaeology (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Should there be a citation after "Although many scientists have claimed to have succeeded in finding sounds from ancient pottery"? Fonny (talk) 12:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Misleading article?[edit]

As far as I can tell, this word has been used hardly at all except as the title of the one book. For Wikipedia to state that it is a field seems misleading. (talk) 23:53, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Google Scholar has quite a few hits with "archaeoacoustics" in the title. I think the way in which the word "field" is used isn't really misleading: "This is an interdisciplinary field which includes areas such as archaeology, ethnomusicology, acoustics and digital modelling, and that is a part of the wider field of Music Archaeology." It's in a conversational tone (doesn't look like a formal definition), and it's also identified as a subfield of something. So I wouldn't read the word as a field in the narrowest, most pedantic sense. But maybe you can think of a better word to use here? We can't call it a "niche" or anything like that as that wouldn't be a neutral description. Hans Adler 00:09, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

removing PROD[edit]

I've contested the PROD for this page... however, I still have serious concerns about the current state of this article. Preliminary searches on Google Books and Google Scholar indicate that the term is at least a legitimate one used in scholarly works, but I do not know that it's being used in the same way as in those sources. Frankly, it sounds a lot like a WP:FRINGE theory. We do have articles on scientific fringe theories, of course, but the article would need to be re-written in a fairly major way to reflect that properly. I've had this page on my watchlist for a while because it struck me as a bit suspicious the first time I read it and I had hoped that I would get up the gumption to investigate it more thoroughly. That hasn't happened and I'm not sure it will happen any time soon. Still, IMO, this article needs a rewrite, not a deletion. Matt Deres (talk) 13:42, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Archaeoacoustics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:29, 8 July 2017 (UTC)