Talk:Unilineal evolution

Too abstract

Besides the fact that there are no references, I believe that the main problem is all abstraction, no specifics. Abstract means that you pluck an idea out from the specifics, so that presents a certain problem for us here. No specifics. We have to guess what all these abstracts might mean, when a couple of instances would allow us too the priviledge of abstraction. We don't want to sound smart, we want to be clear.Botteville (talk) 15:28, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Severe lack of citations

The sections "Global change" and "Major objections and concerns" have 0 citations. These sections may represent editor's opinion as opposed to a survey of expert opinion. Citations would serve these sections well. Auspip (talk) 01:21, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

10 years ago this article had a grand total of...ZERO citations.

Today it has....4.

Not good.
Kirsten Jørgensdatter (talk) 20:46, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

User:Piotrus created this article (with more than 20,000 bytes) on July 19, 2005. It has barely grown in the decade since (it's now just ~23K bytes). After 11 years, perhaps User:Piotrus (who is still an active editor with nearly 300,000 edits) would be willing to give some attention to this article?
Kirsten Jørgensdatter (talk) 20:54, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

@Kirsten Jørgensdatter I appreciate the ping. The article from ancient 2005 certainly does not represent modern standards, and should be rewritten from scratch. Note that I don't remember if I wrote it, it might have been just a split from Sociocultural evolution - you may want to check the history of that article c. 2005 and see if you can locate the true author (if it wasn't me). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:52, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

You seem to be correct. Here is a December 13, 2007 version of sociocultural evolution (that you edited) that includes this line:

"Lewis H. Morgan, an anthropologist whose ideas have had much impact on sociology, in his 1877 classic "Ancient Societies" differentiated between three eras: savagery, barbarism and civilisation, which are divided by technological inventions, like fire, bow, pottery in savage era, domestication of animals, agriculture, metalworking in barbarian era and alphabet and writing in civilisation era."

That exact same line appears in the first version of unilineal evolution.
Kirsten Jørgensdatter (talk) 01:36, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

I took a look at sociocultural evolution and initially it seemed like a more solid article. But then I noticed that more than half of the citations (70+) are from a single book (* Sztompka, Piotr (2002). Socjologia. Znak. ISBN 83-240-0218-9). In fact, all of those 70+ citations come from just 10 pages in that one book. Kirsten Jørgensdatter (talk) 23:39, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

@Kirsten Jørgensdatter That is certainly my addition, as I recall reading and using that book loooong ago. So that part is probably ok. Of course, it would be good to upgrade to refs to English, and add more. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 23:46, 25 April 2026 (UTC)