Talk:Paleolithic religion

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 October 2019 and 11 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lorelie18.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Paleolithic

the paleolithic covers the period 2.5million years ago to 10,000. What could religions covering such a broad period have in common to merit one single categorization. I would recommend a chronological splitting of the paleolithic into lower, middle and upper paleolithic since there would be some similarity in culture and technology within each sub period.Muntuwandi (talk) 13:43, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

then build this article into containing three distinct sections that can be {{split}}. Plus, cite academic literature that treats Paleolithic religion along the categorization you suggest. dab (𒁳) 14:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

All these articles need a serious overhaul, there is too much overlapping and repitition of information, including information that is in the wrong articles. We shouldn't be afraid of change.Muntuwandi (talk) 15:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

There is no one paleolithic religion, therefore the name of the article requires a name change needs a modifaction.

you still haven't bothered to figure out what Wikipedia is about, have you. Try to take this in: we are about WP:CITE. If encyclopedic sources call something "Paleolithic Religion", so will we. Criticism of the term as "needing modification" will need academic references. We don't create new terminology on a whim. The string "Religion during the paleolithic" as of now doesn't produce a single google hit on the wide, wide web. "Paleolithic Religion" otoh immediately comes up as the title of a full lemma in the Macmillan Encyclopedia of Religion among other things. For somebody aware of WP:NAME fudamentals, the move question is thus a no-brainer. --dab (𒁳) 09:14, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

With regard to WP:CITE, none of the references in this article use the term "Paleolithic Religion", none. So the name of this article is already in shaky ground. you can verify this for yourself. When the term "paleolithic religion" appears on the internet, it has little to do with the content in this article I have noticed a trend in which names of articles are being made up on the whim, without support from scientific literature. Such articles as claims of the oldest religion and Chimpanzee spirituality are not mainstream topics for discussion. Muntuwandi (talk) 11:34, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

the burden is on you to motivate a move to a different title. You have completely failed to do that. "Paleolithic religion" is indeed the common term for the topic discussed here. Just do a google scholar search. I'm not here to breastfeed you with information you can perfectly well look up for yourself. dab (𒁳) 12:19, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Dickson (1990) is a monograph of the 35-10 kya period in Southwestern Europe in particular. If you get a hold of that book and summarize it into a standalone article, I have no objections to branching that out as a separate topic. dab (𒁳) 12:27, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Shamanic practices

The commentary for the first picture "archeologists believe that cave paintings of half animal half human beings may be evidence for early shamanic practices during the Paleolithic" may be biased. The number of archaeologists who believe that is actually quite small, the book "Les Chamanes de la Préhistoire" by Jean Clottes, which defended this theory, is highly controversial and was critisized by many in the scientific world. Perhaps the word "some" should be added in the beginning of that sentence. Munin75 (talk) 18:14, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Paleolithic religion. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080417013924/http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/permanent/humanorigins/history/arrival.php to http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/permanent/humanorigins/history/arrival.php

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:55, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

30,000 year old shaman burial

In the Upper Paleolithic section, this line: "The earliest known undisputed burial of a shaman[clarification needed] dates back to the early Upper Paleolithic era (c. 30,000 BC) in the area of the present-day Czech Republic." It is not well sourced and hard to pin down. I think it is referring to Dolní Věstonice (archaeology), but the evidence is certainly not strong enough for the undisputed claim and probably not enough to include the line at all. There is also this competing fact Oldest Shaman Grave Found; Includes Foot, Animal Parts

I think the line should be removed. Any thoughts?Bemis Ampleforth (talk) 20:56, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

The part about Robert E. Ryan book

The way that part is written originally led me to believe that the Lascaux caves had a painting depicting a lion man. However, that is not the case, and the book talks about the Lion-man but never says it's from Lascaux. It does mention multiple other animal-human hybrid paintings in other caves though. I do not know how to rewrite that section myself, but I think it really needs to be. 199.19.253.50 (talk) 17:40, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Actually it's worse than that. The author is an attorney and the publisher a publisher of fringe books, so I've just remove the whole thing. Doug Weller talk 08:29, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Pintura Trois Freres.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:39, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

"The Religion of the Caves" as a Citation

The article currently states "Andre Leroi-Gourhan and Annette Michelson believe unmistakably religious behaviour emerged by the Upper Paleolithic, before 30,000 years ago at the latest", but this seems to be contradicted by the source it cites. While the source does indeed contain the cited statement, the paper argues against it, claiming in the conclusion "the themes which emerge from paleolithic art more directly invite psychoanalytical study than that of the history of religion." 64.118.14.242 (talk) 17:55, 26 December 2022 (UTC)