Talk:Subneolithic

Template Removal
Hey everyone! Just wanted to reach out and enquire about possibly removing the "additional citations for verification" template, looking for any opinions about either improving the article to a point where this is removed or to reach a general consensus for the template's removal. Thanks :) OK872 (talk) 02:39, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Alpha Piscis Austrini, you changed the article's unreferenced tag to more citations needed on 5 April, can you explain what the problem was at that stage? Ever sentence had at least one reference. TSventon (talk) 04:51, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I can't remember that far back. Which article in question? Alpha Piscis Austrini (talk) 11:12, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Alpha Piscis Austrini, this article, Subneolithic. Do you object to the tag being removed now? TSventon (talk) 14:23, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah I know what happened. It still had the no sources tag at the time I was using AWB to go through some articles. That was an oversight on my part. You can remove it now. It should not have been there in the first place. My apologies. Alpha Piscis Austrini (talk) 14:25, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * OK872 I have removed the tag.
 * Alpha Piscis Austrini, thank you, I thought your edit might have meant that the article was no longer unreferenced. TSventon (talk) 15:28, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Alternative names
OK872, do you have references for the alternative names in the infobox? Perhaps you could add a paragraph explaining them?
 * Para-Neolithic could be redirected to Subneolithic
 * Ceramic Mesolithic redirects to Mesolithic, I have added Subneolithic as a see also link
 * Late Mesolithic redirects to Mesolithic
 * Middle Neolithic redirects to Neolithic, is this also an alternative name for Subneolithic? TSventon (talk) 09:44, 22 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I do! I’ll get onto adding that paragraph within the coming week. Again, thanks for all the feedback - it’s been very beneficial OK872 (talk) 14:16, 22 May 2022 (UTC)


 * OK872, Middle Neolithic looks odd, I would expect Subneolithic to be Early Neolithic if anything. Do you have access to Wyszomirska, B., 1983; 1984; 1986 to investigate further? Also do all the terms mean the same thing or are they different but overlapping? Have you encountered Forest Neolithic? TSventon (talk) 11:27, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @TSventon I agree, linearly it doesn't really belong. Unfortunately the sources by Wyszomirska are all in Swedish and I haven't been able to locate any translations so it'd probably be best to cut considering I haven't seen it appear in any other sources either. I have encountered Forest Neolithic a couple of times and so would probably be a more reliable term, I'll add it in and remove Middle Neolithic. OK872 (talk) 12:28, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Site names
OK872 you refer to the Szczepanki site twice, could you say something about the site first to introduce it? Presumably it is in Szczepanki, Warmian-Masurian Voivodeship. Also what are the nowiki tags round Zedmar culture for? Red links like Zedmar culture are fine if an article could be created. TSventon (talk) 08:17, 25 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Oops, the tags were definitely an accident. Have added a little summary for the sites I mention throughout the article under the subheading 'Housing and migration'! OK872 (talk) 05:47, 26 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I have added a section header for the notable sites. It would be useful to add the country and approximate dates for each site if known. TSventon (talk) 10:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Dates
OK872, can I query the dates for the period. 4500–2000 BCE are the dates for the Para-Neolithic at the Dudka and Szczepanki sites. The same paper mentions the introduction of ceramics in the Swifterbant culture in 5200 BCE.

Also,Joe Roe and OK872 should the dates mention calibrated BCE? Or is that too technical to need mentioning? TSventon (talk) 06:43, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * As far as a general reader is concerned, calibrated BCE is just BCE. Unless the sources express some doubt about the calibration, or the article has to include uncalibrated dates (which would be unusual for this period), I wouldn't bother mentioning it. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 07:14, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * @TSventon yes, I must've missed that. A more appropriate period would be 5200-2000 BCE? OK872 (talk) 07:22, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Do sources give a range of dates for the Subneolithic in Europe? If they don't Wikipedia shouldn't either (WP:SYNTHESIS). Perhaps we should say 4500–2000 BCE at the Szczepanki site. Mesolithic mentions a range of dates for different regions, but I haven't checked the sources there. TSventon (talk) 09:09, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I have seen it noted as 3000-2000 BCE (but that seems inappropriate given other sources have recorded Subneolithic societies or artefacts prior to this period):
 * "Interactions and exchanges between societies with different economies undoubtedly existed in the areas surrounding the Baltic Sea - the circum-Baltic during the fourth and third millenium bc. The fishing-forager peoples living in the societies from ca 3000-2000 bc, which existed in Finland, Russia, the circum-Baltic as well as in eastern and southeastern Scandinavia, indicate sedentary settlements and large village communities."
 * Perhaps it would be better to reference the 'period' as the Stone Age? Or else, I've also seen it noted as "5000/4000–3200/2700 cal BC"

OK872 (talk) 13:58, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Summary sentence
TSventon, just noticed the comment under the fishing gear subheading. Would it be preferable just to remove this latter sentence or else rewrite it? OK872 (talk) 09:41, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * OK872, I was responding to the reviewer's request for a reference at Template:Did you know nominations/Subneolithic so it would be best to ask them there. As far as I am concerned, the sentence could be left as it is, removed or supplied with a reference if available. TSventon (talk) 11:28, 16 June 2022 (UTC)