This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Neolithic article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 360 days |
This level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 360 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Semi-protected edit request on 10 April 2023 edit
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The first stanza, which reads "...is an Old World archaeological period...", should be changed to "... is an Afro-Eurasian archaeological period..." for higher comprehensibility as Old World is an ambiguous term. Diditman (talk) 15:38, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
- Old World is more old-fashioned than ambiguous, but Afro-Eurasia is too little known - compare their views: 850 vs 550 per day. Johnbod (talk) 16:02, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
- Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the
{{Edit semi-protected}}
template. M.Bitton (talk) 00:21, 11 April 2023 (UTC)- I support a change. The great majority of hits on the first two pages of google are for computer games called Old World, and many people will not understand it in its traditional - and POV - sense. Afro-Euroasian is less well known, but it is unambiguous and even people who have not come across it will understand it immediately. Dudley Miles (talk) 08:41, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- If there are computer games using a search term, it normally will get the top g-selections. But I find it significant that no one has launched a game called "Afro-Eurasia"! I pretty sure OW is the more familar and better understood term. Johnbod (talk) 14:39, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- We could also sidestep the issue by reverting the lead sentence prior to this edit by Asarlaí. All archaeological periods have a geographical limit, I don't see a compelling need to point this one out specifically in the first sentence. – Joe (talk) 12:43, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- Fine with that, though it has OW at the end of the first para. The trouble with Afro-Eurasia, especially when encountered the first time, is you have to do a relatively complex mental process to conclude that "Africa + (Europe + Asia) = Afro-Eurasia". I doubt it would come out well from readability tests. Johnbod (talk) 14:33, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- I'm happy with the term "Old World" which has the virtues of historical resonance, long-time usage, and common comprehension. I am appalled that a reason for replacing "Old World" is the existence of (ugh!) computer games with the same name. (Sorry, folks, a rant from one who remembers the days when a computer was a guy with an adding machine.) Smallchief (talk) 14:59, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- Fine with that, though it has OW at the end of the first para. The trouble with Afro-Eurasia, especially when encountered the first time, is you have to do a relatively complex mental process to conclude that "Africa + (Europe + Asia) = Afro-Eurasia". I doubt it would come out well from readability tests. Johnbod (talk) 14:33, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- I support a change. The great majority of hits on the first two pages of google are for computer games called Old World, and many people will not understand it in its traditional - and POV - sense. Afro-Euroasian is less well known, but it is unambiguous and even people who have not come across it will understand it immediately. Dudley Miles (talk) 08:41, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- You could always go with the longer "...archaeological period in Africa, Europe, and Asia..." I suppose. Joe's 'leave out the extents entirely" solution is also good. Tewdar 18:46, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
i dont have high enough level but the citation needed box i have a link for if anyone wants to add it edit
its https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Neolithic_Age Dollardollardollar3 (talk) 15:21, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
- Erm... we'll probably need a more reliable source than that, but thanks anyway. Tewdar 16:27, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
Please add this also edit
The Neolithic,or the New Stone Age, saw a lot of advancement in human revolution. Early humans began to understand the importance of farming and started moving towards a more settled life Sreenibro (talk) 16:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 26 September 2023 edit
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please remove "However, evidence of social inequality is still disputed, as settlements such as Çatalhöyük reveal a striking lack of difference in the size of homes and burial sites, suggesting a more egalitarian society with no evidence of the concept of capital, although some homes do appear slightly larger or more elaborately decorated than others." and ", which suggests that some influential individuals were able to organise and direct human labour – though non-hierarchical and voluntary work remain possibilities" these are conjecture with no citation. 137.22.48.159 (talk) 19:23, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- I do not think it right to remove the comment as it is generally accepted as fact. You are right that it needs citation and I do not have access to the sources cited in the Çatalhöyük article, so I have tagged the comment 'citation needed'. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:51, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
Confused edit
I'm confused by this text in the article: "...farming communities had arisen in the Levant and spread to Asia Minor, North Africa and North Mesopotamia. Mesopotamia is the site of the earliest developments of the Neolithic Revolution." If farming arose outside Mesopotamia (in the Levant, which I take to mean Syria or thereabouts), then how can its "earliest development" be in Mesopotamia? Some clarification is needed. Mcswell (talk) 17:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- The basis of both statments is unclear as they are uncited, and I have removed the Mesopotamia comment to make the article less confusing. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- In fact both parts are inaccurate. Farming appears at more or less the same time in the Levant, (Upper) Mesopotamia and other regions of Southwest Asia. – Joe (talk) 10:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)