Talk:Archaeological record

Archaeology Top‑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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anthropology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was selected as the article for improvement on 15 August 2016 for a period of one week.

Info about Nomenclature... section.....

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?as_q=archaeological+nomenclature&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_sdt=1.&as_sdtp=on&as_sdts=5&hl=en

--222.67.216.199 (talk) 04:56, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&q=allintitle%3A+archaeological+classification&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

--222.67.216.199 (talk) 04:57, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--222.67.216.199 (talk) 04:59, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of material removed

Because this article has gone without references for so long it risked deletion, I have stripped it back to just a basic definition supported by sources. It should be expanded to re-incorporate some of the stuff that was there about what kind of things make up the archaeological record (artefacts, biofacts, etc.) but this time with more detail and, of course, references. There is probably also a section on different theoretical views of the nature of the archaeological record, which the Patrik article discusses (as of 1985 - there would have to be a more up-to-date source used too). But writing a section like that in a jargon-free and understandable way is far beyond my ability... —Joseph Roe^Tk•Cb, 19:55, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Understanding the Archaeological Record by Gavin Lucas looks like a good resource for fleshing out this article – the book is structured around "three ways of understanding the archaeological record". It's on Google Books, but if anyone comes across a vital missing passage I have access to the ebook version and could email you a copy (chapter by chapter). Joe Roe (talk) 12:56, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]