Talk:Tepe Sialk

message: This is an email I got from one of the current investigators on Sialk.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "DAI Eurasien-Abteilung, PD Dr. Barbara Helwing" <bh@eurasien.dainst.de>
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 3:46 AM
Subject: Re: Dating of the Sialk ziggurat
Here is a brief answer to your question on the dating of the Sialk grande construction. Please know that it is not a ziqqurat but a 
mudbrick platform, possibly a support for some kind of building standing atop the platform but not necessarily a temple. It dates to the 8th century BC. Some archaeologists have claimed that it dates to the 3rd millennium BC, and it is listed as such in wikipedia, but this is wrong. The dating suggested in the 1930s to the later Iron Age by the excavator, R, Ghirshman, still holds; the Sialk Reconsideration Project run by Dr. Malek Shahmirzadi has dated it to the 3rd millennium BC on the basis of excavating through the backdirt left behind by Ghirshman, which contained som stamp impressions (again wrongly) compared to protoelamite seals. The stamps compare well to Iron Age pottery painting motifs, and the pottery assemblage from the backdirt is mixed. So, solid eviden for a date in the 8th century BC, and not a ziqqurat either.
I hope this helps.
Best regards,
Barbara Helwing  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Salsassin (talk • contribs) 10:08, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major Mistakes means this requires a rewrite 

message: The article could be improved considerable if an internal structure is given to its content (that is, subsections as in here), more noninline references, and a more technical archaeological description of the. Omnipaedista (talk) 15:16, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exposition of information 

message: This should be either Tepe Sialk (the most common name) or just Sialk, but not 'Tappeh Sialk' which is rarely used. As 'Tepe Sialk' seems most useful when searching with Google Books or scholar, I plan to change it to that. Dougweller (talk) 11:46, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds good to me (Tepe Sialk).  I created Tureng Tepe yesterday and saw that the English spelling for hill (tepe) varies greatly in sources.--Milowent • talkblp-r 12:44, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title 

message: A little more care should be placed in the wording of the article. Take for example the first paragraph under the heading 'History'. It reads as follows:
"The Sialk ziggurat was built around the 3000 BC. A joint study between Iran's Cultural Heritage Organization, the Louvre, and the Institut Francais de Recherche en Iran also verifies the oldest settlements in Sialk to date back from 6000-5500 BC"[2][3]
The two sentences above are about two entirely different things. The first sentence, presumably the topic sentence, is about the ziggurat itself, which was built thousands of years after the area was settled by ancient peoples. If you are going to discuss the ziggarat, then discuss it in a separate paragraph. If you are going to discuss the settlement, then discuss it in a separate paragraph. It may be helpful to discuss things chronologically, that is, first discuss the settlement and then notable structures, etc.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.70.65.246 (talk) 17:49, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I fixed that. Then I noticed we've got date problems over the oldest occupation. I can't do that today. Doug Weller talk 20:21, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:29, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion