Talk:African red slip ware

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archaeology Low‑importance

	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.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

we don't need " ware" on this edit

Latest comment: 10 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Ancient_Roman_pottery . Ware is not the common practice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sfsheath (talk • contribs) 00:04, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Experts just say African Red Slip but for the uneducated like me it seems more self-explanatory to include ware. I then have a clue it might be about pottery rather than about an African who slipped on something red. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:40, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

But we don't append " ware" after the phrase when it's used in a sentence. Look at the page itself. THe last sentence of the 2nd paragraph will read poorly if it's " the breakup of commercial contacts that typified the later 7th century coincides with the final decline of the African red slip ware industry. " So we're making people format links when they use it elsewhere. That's a burden. And we're inconsistent. Only regional Roman ceramic categories get " ware" appended. And is "ware" really a non-technical term for the non-expert reader. It has no good definition. It's vague and jargony. Sfsheath (talk) 04:51, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

And yes, I am a dreaded "expert". But I wouldn't be editing wiki Roman pottery pages if I didn't want to communicate with the general public. Sfsheath (talk) 04:52, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

There is no reason why it can't be abbreviated to African Red Slip in the article text. I agree there are inconsistencies in a number of articles but the common name is clearly African Red Slip Ware. Here are some links:

I am sure you can find some links that don't include ware, but the longer name is both less cryptic and has a stronger claim to be the common name in my view. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:26, 8 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Im doing a project about African red slips and I need to find more information on them. edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.12.245.180 (talk) 03:23, 4 February 2010 (UTC) Reply

Add topic