Talk:Late Stone Age

Merger with Upper Paleolithic
No, it is a bad idea. UP refers largely to Europe, LSA to Africa. The two are very different and this difference is reflected in the literature on the topics. --TeaDrinker (talk) 00:31, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Lead picture
The lead pictures in the ESA, MSA, and LSA articles are *all* bifaces! The technological change is far from obvious to the casual reader. Does anyone have a nice picture of some microliths or bone harpoons maybe? Megalophias (talk) 21:32, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree, especially since bifacial foliates are typical of the MSA, not the LSA (in North Africa anyway). The image page does not say where the finds come from, so it is difficult to falsify that they are LSA. I have changed it with a Mouillah point photograph I have taken. I have a picture of a bone point, but it's broken. Nicolas Perrault (talk) 16:22, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

should have been kept as Later Stone Age
In the Africanist archaeological literature, this period is far more widely known as the Later Stone Age. The assertion that "nearly all scholarly literature uses Late Stone Age" is just totally false. This move should be reverted. Here is just one recent example in Nature Communications: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04057-3. That's the standard usage for African archaeology. Ninafundisha (talk) 01:34, 30 May 2021 (UTC)