Talk:Lawrence H. Keeley

One of two primary methods?
The article currently reads:

"Microwear analysis is one of two primary methods (the other being use-wear analysis) for identifying the functions of artifact tools [...] Microwear differs from use-wear because of the scale at which the analysis happens; microwear analysis is the use of microscopy to evaluate and understand these polishes."

But I can't find support for the claim that microwear and use-wear are different methods in the cited sources that I can access (I can't access the SciAm one). As I understand it, "microwear" is simply use-wear analysis that uses a high-powered microscope. Shea and many others use the two terms interchangeably.

Similarly saying "one of two primary methods" is not supported by the sources I can access and the same Shea article notes that the main way archaeologists approach stone tool function is to infer it from form using ethnographic analogies or controlled experiments. Nowadays we can add to that residue analysis, ergonomic analysis, quantitative morphometrics, etc. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 15:37, 27 June 2022 (UTC)