Talk:Stonehenge/Archive 4

Semi-protected edit request on 24 November 2021

Remove the Sketch allegedly "...showing the tongue and groove and mortise and tenon joints used in the outer Sarsen circle" which is incorrect. Replace the sentence "The lintels were fitted to one another using another woodworking method, the tongue and groove joint." by the correct sentence "The lintel ends butt to one another." This is evident in aerial views. 84.214.215.102 (talk) 19:51, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

The claim that the lintels at Stonehenge were linked end-to-end by tongue and groove joints is seductive because it implies an astonishing, even incredible, precision of stone working. The idea also implies deliberate chirality of construction with implications for the direction of any circular ceremonial procession. The state protectors of Stonehenge, English Heritage, have sent the statement shown. There is not sufficient evidence for Dr. Greaney's claim that "some stones have one tongue and one grooves, others two of each" for me or WP:RS. Philvoids (talk) 19:08, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

DNA

The section about the DNA is growing bigger and bigger. To be honest, I have difficulty to see the relevance of DNA in relation to the stone monument. Just plain remove it might be a bit harsh, so I suggest a split off of the DNA-part into a new article. The Banner talk 17:54, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@The Banner I haven’t looked in detail but there may be some OR/synthesis. And of course “Notably” is a “ word to avoid”. I’m not convinced about an article or that this could be cut to a paragraph. Doug Weller talk 18:07, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Funnily enough, that section contains nothing about the aDNA of individuals actually associated with Stonehenge, and lots of stuff about ancient people only generally associated with the same time period. 🤔  Tewdar  19:06, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Rather than a new article, I think we should just retain and prune the parts relating to 'original builders==EEFs' and 'late stage associated with migrating Beaker folk', which is well documented, along with whatever other relevant aDNA results we can include relating to the Stonehenge site (and wider ceremonial landscape). Sound good?  Tewdar  19:44, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Agreed on all points noted above. The article is now 25% larger than the recommended article size and needs to be trimmed/split not expanded. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 21:04, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Photos from 1931, hi-res downloads available.

Clean black and white photos of what seems to be S., probably taken by hungarian tourists: https://fortepan.hu/en/photos/?id=257403 , https://fortepan.hu/en/photos/?id=257404 , https://fortepan.hu/en/photos/?id=257405 (Note: Fortepan is a webportal indexing vintage photography donated by hungarian sources.) 19:03, 10 December 2022 (UTC) 94.21.229.41 (talk) 19:03, 10 December 2022 (UTC)