Talk:Number of Identified Specimens
Add topicLatest comment: 3 years ago by RockviewLove in topic Number of Identified Specimens page
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | A member of the Guild of Copy Editors, Exobiotic, reviewed a version of this article for copy editing on 23 June 2023. However, a major copy edit was inappropriate at that time because of the issues specified below, or the other tags now found on this article. Once these issues have been addressed, and any related tags have been cleared, please tag the article once again for {{Copy edit}}. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English. Visit our project page if you are interested in joining! Please address the following issues as well as any other cleanup tags before re-tagging this article with copyedit: more and better citations needed, total rewrite or cleanup |
Number of Identified Specimens page
[edit]I am not quite sure what to make of this article. To me, it seems a bit rambling and appears to be cut and paste from study notes. The author really does not like zooarchaeologists. It is hard to read and does not seem to make sense? At least not to me, but I'm not in this field. I've tidied it up a bit, but it needs an overhaul if anyone is going to use it well. And most of the links are duds? Perhaps archaeology is just not my thing. RockviewLove (talk) 17:35, 23 March 2023 (UTC)