User talk:Mididoctors

Welcome to Wikipedia![edit]

Dear Mididoctors: Welcome to Wikipedia, a free and open-content encyclopedia. I hope you enjoy contributing. To help get you settled in, I thought you might find the following pages useful:

Don't worry too much about being perfect. Very few of us are! Just in case you are not perfect, click here to see how you can avoid making common mistakes.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Wikipedians try to follow a strict policy of never biting new users. If you are unsure of how to do something, you are welcome to ask a more experienced user such as an administrator. One last bit of advice: please sign any discussion comment with four tildes (~~~~). The software will automatically convert this into your signature which can be altered in the "Preferences" tab at the top of the screen. I hope I have not overwhelmed you with information. If you need any help just let me know. Once again welcome to Wikipedia, and don't forget to tell us about yourself and be BOLD! HighInBC 22:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archaeology articles[edit]

Hi, sorry it's taken me a while to get back to you. I don't have a lot of time available for WP at the moment. I think it's great what you have been doing, and thanks for the personal contact. My thoughts are that one of us should create the article for Methods and principles in archaeology to go with the Category:Methods and principles in archaeology. I agree with you that Archaeological science is actually a sub-category, and it would be great to have excavation techniques and features organised, possibly also forming another sub-category. Another problem in the archaeology articles is lack of images and lack of references, so all such improvement would be welcomed by the community. Don't worry about quality of English. One thing that I have found is that if someone makes a start on an article, and gets some good structure and content into it, there are lots of editors who will come along later and improve the grammar, spelling and links! I should have some time in a week or so, and might be able to have a go at Methods and principles in archaeology then. Welcome again. Viv Hamilton 17:40, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Law of Horizontality[edit]

Hello, why did you blank the page Law of Horizontality ? The redirect to Law of horizontality looks legitimate to me. Schutz 18:18, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

don,t think I did that if i did i will need to recall why? is it my name signed..hold on i will have to check this out give me a hour or so Boris 18:57, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dating methodology (archaeology)[edit]

I just did some editing of Dating methodology (archaeology) and I see all the previous work was yours. Well done. (There are still one or two rather densely-written sentences but I've left it for someone else.) Nurg 05:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've collected all dating methods into one category Category:Dating methods Viv Hamilton 15:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dating methods category[edit]

To be honest I found the number of articles in the methods and principles category a bit daunting - a question of not being able to see the wood for the trees - hence the subcategory. There were a few articles like Harris matrix, context, sequence etc., which are principles of the way one works, but also fundamental to dating, I thought I'd erred on the side of leaving those in methods and principles, but clearly at least one slipped through. There are bound to be a few of them that we later decide need recategorising. I will try to find time to have a go at the outline of the methods and principles article! Viv Hamilton 17:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can[edit]

The article Archaeological plan, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
You have been left this message by PocKleanBot, an automated process that notifies editors that articles to which they may have contributed on more than one occasion in the past now need cleanup. If you have any comments or object to this message being left, please leave a message on PocKleanBot's talk page.

Pictures[edit]

Hi Mididoctors, you placed several pictures of Romano celtic temples in Wikicommons. You did not say, where these temples were excavated (London, Southwark?). I like to use the pictures for several articles, but would like to know the location. Can you help? Thank you. -- Udimu 08:06, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

maany thanks. -- Udimu 22:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Olmec[edit]

Hi Mididoctors

Can you take a look at Olmec. I did an unfinished GA review on it with lots of problems surfacing because opinions were simply picked from literature without providing at least a short string of evidence leading to these conclusions. I also have doubts that you can equal ethnicity and language, the radiocarbon dates possibly not calibrated and statements that there were "full-time priests and shamans" makes me doubt if the source is reflected correctly. Thanks a lot. Greetings Wandalstouring (talk) 17:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Archaeological natural[edit]

A group of us are working on clearing the backlog at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Articles_lacking_sources_from_October_2006. The article in the above header has been without sources for the past four years and may be removed if none are added. I wonder if you can help do so. Sincerely, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 05:52, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Archaeological record[edit]

A group of us are working on clearing the backlog at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Articles_lacking_sources_from_October_2006. The article in the above header has been without sources for the past four years and may be removed if none are added. I wonder if you can help do so. Sincerely, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 05:56, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Fill (archaeology)[edit]

The article Fill (archaeology) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced for over five years, fails WP:V

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Stifle (talk) 23:01, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion[edit]

Nomination of Alignment (archaeology) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alignment (archaeology) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alignment (archaeology) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 14:43, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:20, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Archaeological sequence for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Archaeological sequence is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Archaeological sequence until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Joe Roe (talk) 07:10, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]