Template talk:Prehistoric caves

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Archaeology (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

More countries[edit]

I don't know yet how to add these:

Bosnia and Herzogovina

Badanj Cave

Bulgaria

Kozarnika


Czech Republic

Finland

  • Wolf cave (there's more recent stuff about the Neanderthal claims that aren't in the article)

Germany

  • Hohle Fels (there's a French stub but it's not in the template for some reason)

Gibraltar

Malta Għar Dalam

Poland

Paradise Cave

Slovakia Jasovská Cave

Switzerland Wildkirchli

UK

Cresswell Crags

Gough's Cave

Heathery Burn Cave

Kents Cavern

Portbraddon Cave

Thor's Cave

Russia


Asia:

Turkey Belbaşı Karain Cave

Australia:

Koongine Cave

Koonalda Cave

NORTH AMERICA

Brazil:

Caverna da Pedra Pintada


Canada: Bluefish Caves

Belize: Actun Tunichil Muknal

Barton Creek Cave


Doug Weller talk 18:07, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

maximum number of subgroups is 20[edit]

Hi! I guess the maximum number of groups for this template is 20 see here, which means the number of countries for each continent is confined to 20. No worries - we find a solution...

ATBWikirictor talk • contribs

We could split them into e.g. "Western Europe", etc.? Joe Roe (talk) 08:40, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
For now i simply put Russia in the Asia group, thanks for the suggestion, though.Wikirictor (talk) 09:15, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

UNESCO[edit]

Does anyone know why the box is subtitled with UNESCO? These aren't just UNESCO-recognised sites, are they? Joe Roe (talk) 08:39, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

No idea - it would be great to know whether the box is supposed to give a general overview or whether excessive listing like the French section is desired. Wikirictor (talk) 09:13, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
I was going to get rid of that. It's in the French version[1] but makes no sense. I think at the moment it should be as inclusive as possible, and even then I know we will be missing some where we actually have articles, or at least the fact that I keep finding them suggests that. I'll probably prune some of the red links, but I need to check them first. For instance, User:Doug Weller/draft/Pair-non-Pair which is I think the 3rd decorated cave ever found needs an article. Doug Weller talk 11:34, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Painted isn't inclusive enough, "decorated" is the common term[edit]

Some caves are engraved only which is way I used 'decorated caves', a common term in the literature.[2][3][4]

@Wikirictor and Joe Roe: what are your thoughts? And Wikirictor, thanks very much for your technical help. I was completely stuck on the technical side. Doug Weller talk 11:59, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Also big thanks for the nice co-operation.
I have some questions. Do caves qualify, which hold fossils of extinct animals? Do caves qualify, that are of mere geological value? But...maybe i should read your links first....
It is an honor to work with you guys. Tell me, whenever you need help. Do you want me to create the "Pair-non-Pair" article? Also let me know if you wish to change the layout of the Nav-box. I will read more into the documentation in the next few days - think in a week we have a beautiful and handy overview. ATB Wikirictor (talk) 12:23, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
Those seems like different categories to me. I imagined this would just be caves of archaeological interest. Since the UNESCO subtitle now isn't necessary, we could perhaps replace it with a list of inclusion criteria. Joe Roe (talk) 13:30, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
My instinct would be to keep it simple, something like "Prehistoric cave sites" that encompasses any sort of human activity. But we don't have a corresponding article for that (maybe we should?), only cave painting. In which case using decorated sounds sensible (sorry – I just assumed it was a straight translation from French). Joe Roe (talk) 13:27, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
So i suggest to focus on the Paleo-anthropologic context, which includes all caves with fossils of the genus Homo, all caves with assemblages and settlement records, all decorated caves and localities for spiritual gatherings...there's probably more. ATB Wikirictor (talk) 14:54, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
Sort of - "prehistoric" implies only genus homo and artefacts. Not with settlement records as those would be historical, and not all decorated caves because many of those aren't prehistoric. Spiritual gatherings? As this is about prehistoric caves, that's covered by artefacts and decoration. [[]User:Wikirictor]], I'd love your help with Pair-non-Pair - the French article is not really that good though as it isn't properly sourced. There are enough English language sources for it. Doug Weller talk 16:32, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Iran[edit]

Doug Weller talk 13:38, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Lebanon[edit]

Doug Weller talk 13:48, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Philippines[edit]

Doug Weller talk 13:51, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Sri Lanka[edit]

Doug Weller talk 13:54, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Thailand[edit]

Doug Weller talk 13:57, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Good to go?[edit]

What else needs to be done to move this out of draft? Doug Weller talk 13:21, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Yeah - it is great for now - but it will grow. I have requested an extension or an alternative HERE. Let's see what happens. If we get something more suitable, i will move the content.

Been working on the pair-non-pair page already. There is a lot more info out there, than the French article suggests. ATBWikirictor (talk) 16:14, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

I just got some reply for my request. You should read it HERE Wikirictor (talk) 18:02, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Looks good to me. I'll move it to Template: Joe Roe (talk) 22:39, 29 July 2016 (UTC)


Couvin Cave[edit]

In the French article here is nothing about prehistoric occupation let alone cave art. ATBWikirictor (talk) 01:58, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Great navbox, wikidea[edit]

Hi all, congrats to the great navbox. Although it is getting large(r), it is very informative. I have shortened some titles and I think it is a good idea to do that to other caves to make the navbox not cavernously big; in case of <cave of Nuestra Señora de la Virgen in National Park Quetzalcoatl>, I think the name can and must be shorter. Only real known combinations with "Cave" imho should be used. The famous Cueva de las Manos is called "Las Manos" here and I think that name serves both the informational need and the need to keep the large and rapidly growing navbox (it should be about navigation) a bit concised. At least two caves in Peru do not have an en:wiki article yet, so I didn't add them yet: es:Jayhuamachay and es:Tres Ventanas. Great initiative, kudos, cheers, Tisquesusa (talk) 18:24, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

I've noticed a large number of them have "Cave" in the article title (in English or otherwise) which, even if it is part of the common name, seems entirely redundant in this context. My vote would be for getting rid of it completely. Joe Roe (talk) 19:51, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
👍 Like, Tisquesusa (talk) 21:26, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Include rock shelters?[edit]

This has been worrying me a bit. Trou de l’Abîme is a cave and a rock shelter, and the literature treats them as one site. Others are similar while some are just rock shelters. Roc-aux-Sorciers is a rock shelter with an associated cave. Diepkloof Rock Shelter seems not to be a cave although the article and at least one source uses the word cave at times. I note that 5 of the French entries use the word 'abri', which means rock shelter. Doug Weller talk 15:56, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

I think it would be splitting hairs to exclude them. Is there a good reason to? Joe Roe (talk) 16:04, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Nope, we'll do it. Doug Weller talk 11:59, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Made smaller; navbox is collapsible per continent and collapsed as default[edit]

I think this edit should solve the issue some editors have with the large size of the previous version. The navbox when uncollapsed in the root (first choice of the reader) is considerably smaller than before and not spanning more than the article lengths. When the reader is interested in showing all continents, that is done with a few clicks, but if he/she wants to see only the caves listed per continent, those show up with a simple click. No reason to delete this template in progress, less when the reworking into a more navigatable format is so quickly done. Less without even discussing it first, but dumping ugly tags on a nice navbox. Imagine your work colleague re-arranging your desktop (Windows, or real) according to his/her liking, even without respecting your work in arranging it the way you like and that fits in the general Manual of Style of the work environment. Work on the articles instead of deleting the hard work of many knowledgeable and interested Wiki authors, e.g. @Fraenir, Doug Weller, Wikirictor, and Joe Roe:)...

Articles for improvement[edit]

  • Missing infoboxes
  • Missing coordinates
  • Missing images, available on Commons
  • References, notes, further reading, external links and bibliography
  • Text checks
  • Links to other articles/see alsos
There's enough useful, constructive editing to do...
Tisquesusa (talk) 18:20, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, making the template collapsible per continent is a great idea. If it's possible, I think we should consider making the template collapsible again for certain countries: France, Spain, South Africa, the US, and any other nations when their elements reach a certain size. Fraenir (talk) 19:00, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Great Job, guys! Just saw it. Perfect solution everybody should be able to live with. ATBWikirictor (talk) 00:19, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Jersey[edit]

Hi! Is it really necessary to separate Jersey from the UK? We better keep it as compact as possible. ATBWikirictor (talk) 12:00, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Technically Jersey isn't part of the UK. My instinct would be to merge them and risk the ire of the Islanders, though... Joe Roe (talk) 13:51, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Flag icons[edit]

Since the only relevance of modern states to the subject is their custody of the sites, their flags seem to me of dubious value: the country names ought to be enough. Moreover, one concern being expressed at TfD is the template’s size, and I expect removing the graphics would make it look considerably smaller and less imposing. See also MOS:FLAG.—Odysseus1479 06:36, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

AgreeWikirictor (talk) 08:14, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Definitely, they should go. Doug Weller talk 18:56, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
 Done. Agreed. Joe Roe (talk) 23:20, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Missing entries[edit]

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Skysmith's list of missing articles/Archaeology and Paleontology#Caves (kudos to Skysmith) for a list of cave sites that might be created and added to this template. – Joe (talk) 12:24, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! ATBWikirictor (talk) 14:10, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Info boxes[edit]

Hi! All articles of the Europe section have an info-box now - and the Template:Prehistoric caves, of course. If i missed something, let me know, please. I used the Ancient Site box, because it has the best parameters and looks better (i hate the dirt-brown background on top of the Cave info-box), but I didn't replace the existing info-boxes. There are a few caves left in Spain, where i should add the UNESCO info, though. However....i move on to Asia now. All the best Wikirictor 11:00, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

BTW - i generated coordinates with THIS tool. All the best Wikirictor 11:08, 25 February 2017 (UTC)