Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I need Members Help!!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I need Members Help!!

    I recently got a private message asking why don't we put together a glossary of terms such as "Basil Grinding" , I immediately went to our "Information Section" found a section on general archaeological terms:

    WESTERN ARTIFACTS WEBSITE INFORMATION [link provided by member Greywolf22] The Western Artifacts website has great information and pictures explaining the



    also this thread on lithic terminology, but which has not yet been populated, and looks like it could use our members help:



    We as seasoned hunters use terms that we understand, but are not common to a new person wanting to learn, such as side notch, corner notch, basil thinning, fluting flakes, cores, lithic's, transverse flaking,......... well you get the Idea.

    I am asking for members to help with these terms. If you can contribute a few terms and the meanings to this thread, we can then build a glossary of terms from A to Z to add a complete glossary to the Information Center. Right now just the terms and there meanings would be great, we can organize it after we get a basic start.

    If there is a term you do not understand please add it for other members to give the meaning. we can do this with the quote function.

    I want to thank the members in advance for their contributions!
    Look to the ground for it holds the past!

  • #2
    It has been done and published- http://arrowheads1.com/artifactinfo/glossary.htm
    I'm sure if you ask Matt Rowe you can link to it.

    Comment


    • #3
      Picture worth a thousand words. :dunno:

      :dunno:
      http://joshinmo.weebly.com

      Comment


      • #4
        This is a great idea, but I could I just make a few comments?

        I hadn’t yet (still haven’t) finished the organisation of this section of the Information Center, but have just made another step towards that. The “Understanding Archaeological Terms” section linked above now has with additional content (but I deleted some of the original information).

        I did this for a number of reasons, not least because a member had ridden roughshod over someone else’s copyright. I have now provided a link to where that information resides rather than “stealing” the content and as a consequence it’s also now more comprehensive as a reference source.

        I also particularly recommend Barbara Ann Kipfer’s Dictionary of Artifacts, for which I have provided a link to download the document. The only criticism is that it’s not well illustrated.

        Matt’s glossary is excellent too (the link provided by Cliff, above) and I will explore the possibilities for adding it to our Information Center. I’m slightly uncomfortable about that because it is in a sense a “competing” site to our own… but I think we’re all grown up enough to recognise that we don’t compete at an individual level when it comes to knowledge-sharing (at least, I hope not).


        Compiling our own directory/glossary is a great idea but I would ask you to consider the following:

        1. Unless something has changed as a result of the forum software upgrade, there is no way to re-order posts in an alphabetical manner. They’re always ordered by date. That means when I structure the information I have been compiling to be alphabetical, I have to copy/paste sel-ectively and then delete the original post. The compiled alphabetical information then appears under my name (or whoever else does the compiling), although I add a credit for whoever originally provided it.

        2. Compiling alphabetical information in this way means that the post within the thread gets longer and longer. There must be a limit to how long it can be, although I haven’t reached it yet. I think we would certainly reach it if we created a complete A-Z for archaeological terms. In some areas of the Information Center, I have tried to anticipate this kind of problem by creating several individual posts within a thread for parts of the alphabet… ie A-E; F-J; K-O etc which then spreads the load across multiple posts such that the limit is less likely to be reached. But, as I said, I don’t know what the limit might be or whether there is also a limit for number/combined total size of images within an individual post. We absolutely have to avoid it from the outset because trying to correct it afterwards would be an editing nightmare.

        3. My feeling is that what would be of the most immediate benefit is a glossary of LITHIC terminology. That would also help contain the size of the task (archaeological terminology in general would run to thousands of entries). Better still if it could be illustrated by members’ own photographs (or drawings) so that we don’t have to worry about copyright. Josh is right… a picture is worth a thousand words. I had in fact begun compiling such a list but it would be great if members could throw up terms they don’t understand and respondents could explain and add appropriate pictures. Many hands make light work.

        4. We could de-risk any post-size limit by creating 26 place-markers within the Information Center thread (one for each letter of the alphabet) where the edited information will ultimately be filed. Some letters will inevitably be used more often than others, so I would still like to know what the cumulative limit per post might be in order to have confidence that we won’t reach it in any of the letters.

        Chase: any idea how we could determine if a post has a limit in terms of number of characters, pictures or total combined size of images?
        If none of the above makes any sense, here’s a link to the kind of framework we could have:


        I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who.

        Comment

        Working...
        X