Talk:The Neanderthals Rediscovered/GA1

Latest comment: 8 months ago by Chiswick Chap in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 19:45, 18 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Comments

edit

This is about as close to an instant pass as any article I can remember, as it's properly constructed, illustrated, and cited, and very nicely written too. For the sake of decency I'll mention a couple of very minor points.

  • "Background and publication" seems to cover two, or perhaps three, very different topics: what Neanderthals were; who the authors are; and the publication history of the book. Since these events are separated by some 40,000 years, it seems a bit odd to lump 'em together. I suppose the first two could be called "Context", but that section really shouldn't contain book details.
  • 77 illustrations: are all those photographs, or are there maps and diagrams too? I'd certainly hope there were maps, and if I was reading up about suitable books, I'd want to select one that gave me a proper geographic overview as well as the history.
  • "if Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans cohabited in Europe": perhaps the verb "cohabited" isn't ideal, as it could mean they slept together rather than coexisted in the same region. Actually there is evidence of interbreeding too, but that's another story.
  • "they took their twin sons home from the hospital they were born in". Maybe the two instances of "they" need a little work.
  • "covers the contemporary understanding of Neanderthals": actually on re-reading this I don't know quite what "contemporary" means here: that the book is out-of-date already, as is slightly implied by the Reception section? or that it is nicely up-to-date, having taken in the advances made between 2007 and 2013? Perhaps this could be expanded and clarified slightly.
  • I always stumble over "predated" (... predation) and perhaps other readers do too. After all, both groups ate meat, and cannibalism is mentioned ...
  • "Both authors had published books previously; Papagianni was an editor of the 2008 archaeological compilation Time and Change: Archaeological and Anthropological Perspectives on the Long-Term in Hunter-Gatherer Societies[10] and Morse the author of How the Celts Came to Britain, published in 2005 by Tempus Publishing, which was selected as one of The Times Literary Supplement's Books of the Year.[11][12]" ... is rather a long sentence. Maybe split it?
  • Maybe wikilink Native Americans (there is quite a choice of articles to link here, actually).
  • The images are both suitably licensed.

Summary

edit

This is a fine article and I hope to award it a GA shortly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:07, 18 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thanks so much for the prompt review and commentary! I believe these are all addressed. Vaticidalprophet 10:51, 19 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.