Talk:Yangshao culture

Machang
Machang => Machang culture because the linked Machang was somewhere in SEasia.


 * Yes, but as you can see the subsection is dealing with archaeological phases, not cultures. They are conceptually different. Maybe it is possible to set up the link so it reads 'phase' but sends the reader to Machang culture, no? Or need disambiguation page ? Mumun 22:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I think Machang (site) or Machang (archaeological site) works best; Machang phase and Machang culture should redirect to the above--Confuzion 02:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Opps, my bad. It was originally meant to be Machang, and now fixed. Hanfresco 08:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

infobox experiment
added an infobox, perhaps in the future all chinese neolithic articles will be tagged with something like this.--Gurdjieff (talk) 06:07, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Yangshao is Sino-Tibetan
On page 139,Laurent Sagart clearly say Yangshao evolve into Sino-Tibetan.

'I hypothesize that the PSTAN-speaking population increased in density and expanded out of its original homeland, splitting into a western group, probably corresponding to the Yăngsháo culture, and an eastern group, corresponding to the Bĕixīn-Dàwènkŏu culture complex (from 7000 BP). Out of the western group ST would eventually evolve.'

On page 144,you can see from the chart Yangshao is being label as Sino-Tibetan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShanghaiWu (talk) 04:14, 16 March 2014 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs)

Physical type
In response to a query from User:Balthazarduju in my talk page about this edit: the source says "they seem closest to such modern populations as southern Chinese, some Indochinese peoples, and Indonesians, according to Yen Yen, a physical anthropologist of the Institute of Archaeology, who studied them." The only article by Yen Yen cited is about a different site, so this seems to be based on a personal communication. It should be made clear that this is the view of a single scholar, and given its limited support it probably doesn't belong in the lead. Kanguole 12:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree. I changed it to cite the specific scholar and also added additional citation from a separate research paper. I also noticed that the link claiming "Yangshao is a precursor to Longshan" is of dubious quality at best and actually the most recent research I've read (Underhill) states that actually the Dawenkou is a predecessor of the Longshan. For the second citation I changed "South Asian race of Mongoloid" to Southeast Asian because it's more politically correct--Easy772 (talk) 06:31, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

I've read the "Oldest playable musical instruments found at Jiahu early Neolithic site in China" and the citation they use (#6) to claim a "Northern Mongolian" affinity is "Origins of Chinese Civilization" by Knightley. The book clearly states that the remains of Banpo were closest to modern Southern Chinesea as well as Southeast Asians, not northern Mongolians. It seems the author of the letter is twisting the words of Knightley's book. --Easy772 (talk) 02:47, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

After reading more on the physical characteristics of Yangshao human remains, It's clear that they are most similar to modern Southern Chinese overall. I cannot find a source that could qualify as secondary for this, but the section as a whole is misleading, so I can't update the article accordingly. If there are no objections, I would like to remove the entire section rather than mislead or confuse readers. --Easy772 (talk) 19:55, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Why use BC???
Perhaps this could be changed to the more culturally appropriate dating system of "BCE"? --Pete (talk) 01:24, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The BC/AD system is more familiar and more widely understood, which is presumably why it is used by so many authors in this field.
 * Not true. Irrelevant to this article, in any case. --Pete (talk) 11:00, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * It is true that the BC/AD system is more familiar and more widely understood, and also that it is used by many authors in Chinese archaeology, e.g. in the reference list for this article. Kanguole 16:28, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Maybe it's more familiar to you. However, BC/AD is not the general usage in this area unless aiming at a non-scientific audience. We're an encyclopaedia, not The History Channel. --Pete (talk) 18:50, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * It certainly is widely familiar. Regarding usage in the area, I've given some pointers above.  Kanguole 22:34, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I think the issue is minor. I think 90% of the people could figure out what BC or BCE means given the context or a quick internet search.--Easy772 (talk) 16:02, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

To add to article
To add to this article: there is evidence of musical instrument use by the Yangshao culture, particularly the red pottery drum (hong tao gu, 红陶鼓). 173.88.246.138 (talk) 01:27, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:38, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The origin and spread of the Sino-Tibetan language family.png

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:50, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Bone mask, Early Neolithic period, 骨面具, 新石器時代, IMG 1798 04.jpg
 * Pointed Based, Wine Warmer, Pottery amphora, Banpo style, Yangshao culture, 仰韶文化, 半坡遺址, 尖底瓶, 欹器, 宥坐之器, 31.5 cm IMG 0345 09.jpg