Template talk:Human history and prehistory
History Template‑class | |||||||
|
Archaeology Template‑class | |||||||
|
Stone ages
If there is the Iron Age, the Bronze Age and a number of Stone Ages, that's not really a three age system. Just because it's made up of bits which themselves could be called ages doesn't mean the Stone Ages can't be an age. You can have a set of sets. JIMp talk·cont 06:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- It is a factor of the history of archaeology the Three-age system had a stone age before it was subdivided. Personally I would love to see the back of the whole system but it is still useful...PatHadley (talk) 22:01, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Missing Mesolithic
Is there any particular reason the Mesolithic shouldn't be on this template? PatHadley (talk) 22:01, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
- Not all regions of the world had a Mesolithic period. But as it was a substantial phase in the prehistory of a large part of Europe, I think it was useful to add it, so I just did that. Bever (talk) 21:47, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Removing history
Since there is already a template for historic periods, is there a strong argument that the historic periods need to stay on this template too? I'm in the process of improving a range of the prehistory articles and the template is useful but a little bulky. I'd love to trim off the historic bits and improve the prehistory section.... Anyone object PatHadley (talk) 12:18, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
- Ok, I've looked at some of the 'big-picture' articles on which this template is used (such as Ancient History) and this context it is arguably quite useful to see the whole picture in one view. PatHadley (talk) 17:04, 2 October 2011 (UTC)]
Late Modern History issues
First of all, let me say that the "
Additionally, the subheading of "
InvaderCito (talk) 22:32, 30 May 2013 (UTC)