Talk:Nebra sky disc

message: The article refers to the subject as both a "sky disk" and a "skydisk." Logically, this should follow some consistency. 75.72.7.108 (talk) 18:39, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling Consistency

message: Anybody else noticed that this resembles a cartoon smiley face that's winking at us? Could it be anymore blatant? ;)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.21.24.130 (talk) 09:18, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, my first reaction. Clearly not the first one to notice it. Mcowell1 (talk) 19:42, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

text: See Pareidolia. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:58, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Winking smiley-face?

message: I added this section to the article to help explain the possible reason for the Disk's creation as a record of the Earth's Longest Day.  Ciroa felt it was too religious so I removed as many religious views from the section and shortened all Bible references but left links.  99.119.221.56 felt it lacked the same style. while I did not write the body of the original article I only composed this section to help enlighten those who had a heart for deeper understanding as to the disks creation.  So in lite of 99.119.221.56 comments I tried to align the style with that of the rest of the article more informative and less personal.
the original title page was removed and a revised section was put in.  This sections also was revised and updated.
However with respect to those who commented below about the original section I have left their posts intact.  Fibroman
:Regardless of the content, the style of the addition is suspect and needs a rewrite. Go back and look at the section you added, then compare it with the rest of the article. You'll see that the styles used are very different from each other. 99.119.221.56 (talk) 06:10, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed this section that perhaps belongs to Biblical_cosmology. Would you be so kind as to include it in the appropriate article, please? Large quotes of one book should be avoided and references are NOT added at the end of the reflist tag: please, add the reference following the text of the article and surrounding it with the ref tags, like this: This is the text of the article. Text of reference goes here. Ciroa (talk) 08:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs. TIA. 92.140.120.129 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 23:30, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nebra Sky disk - A Record of the Earths Longest Day 

message: I have corrected the previous version; the accompanying finds were NOT discovered by archaeologists who opened the dig after the illicit finders had led them to the supposed finding site. In fact, the accompanying finds had already been removed together with the disk by the looters in the first place. The archaeologists only found some traces that support the looters' claim. Please feel free to correct my English in the article, since I am no native speaker. --89.56.199.255 13:11, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Minor correction

message: The German version of this article appears to have a great deal of useful commentary that might be edited in here. --Wetman 19:35, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello,
I too studied the article in the german Wikipedia and it is sure 
and by now proven and widely accepted that this disc is true and no fake!
Scientist used high tech to research the age and the developement.
I think too it is time change this article here accordingly...--Kenaz9 02:20, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: German Wikipedia

message: Have been researching this subject for senior year project and found some very useful websites - I have linked an article by the archeologist who aquired the disc from the looters, Dr Wolfhard Schlosser, (it is in German but nonetheless useful as an informed source, and even a Babelfish translation makes it fairly readable) and also a link to a copy of an article in the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (to read the original on the official website you have to pay), which gives some details about the trial of the looters and Peter Shauer's views that the disc is fake. -- master_gopher
:Perhaps you'd be willing to introduce some detail from the articles you've found—or even from German Wikipedia. --Wetman 01:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Added Links

message: Does WP have an article on Associative dating because I can't find one. It seems like the sort of thing that should be found in an encylopedia. As such I made "associative dating" a link. - 22nov 2006 - 23:03 UTC"
:It is called relative dating.--Ciroa (talk) 09:14, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Associative dating

message: "...looted by illegal treasure hunters..."? A couple of guys find something in the dirt somewhere and get arrested for it? Who decides what an "archaeological artifact" is? If I dig up a 50 year old coin somewhere in Saxony-Anhalt, do the stormtroopers shoot first and ask questions later?
:: Mr Ameriturd (expletive removed remember children read these discussions), German police are not stormtroopers. -- 77.190.218.151 (talk) 19:44, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: these were professionals, equipped with metal detectors, fully aware they were doing something illegal, and they immediately sold the finds to professional handlers. dab (𒁳) 07:57, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oh, dear. 

message: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6722953.stm -- AnonMoos 06:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent BBC article

message: From the article: <I>"The disk has begun to attract the kind of pseudoarchaeology, neopagan and paranormal speculation that is associated with Stonehenge and Arkaim."</I>  If this is at all relevant, then at least give some examples of what these speculations are and why they're false. MaryJones 22:42, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Popular Culture?

message: The Nebra disk should be considered serious. Even the BBC reaction this summer -- see URL up there -- has the reaction which has a sound of dismiss. Pity, because, one is not used to that intonation coming from that house. The Eurepoean nelithic and eneolithic past should not be underestimated, because it is the predcessor of later cultures that are possible to trace in pre-Homer cultures down to the South and East: Hetites and later. The fact that, excluding the Stonehenge, in eneolithic times these cultures could not put the trace in the stone, like it is in Mykena od Troy cultures, does not mean they did not existed! The big picture tells that the origins of culture which were at a time or earlier then Old Kingdom od Egypt were good developed and existed in Central Europe like Baden_culture, Starčevac Culture and Vu%C4%8Dedol_culture. And, by the way, the Vučedol Orion is much more precise - and older - calendar then Nebra and Stonehenge.
Mak13 (talk) 22:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: these are full topics in their own right, Neolithic Europe and Bronze Age Europe. They are rather specialized topics, but I am not sure why you think they aren't taken seriously. dab (𒁳) 08:38, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pity About Irelevant Discussion 

message: Simple fact, observable by anyone: the Moon is lit by the Sun, therefore a Crescent would have its centres of arc away from the Sun, not toward it.  Thus, if that be a Crescent, then the other be a Full Moon, not the Sun. It is highly unlikely that the makers of this Disc could have got it wrong.AptitudeDesign (talk) 10:30, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If you were replying to the text above, I've deleted it as this is not a forum to discuss the disc. You'll need reliable sources to verify that such sources agree with you. Dougweller (talk) 10:44, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think you have a fair point.  I don't accept that it MUST be the sun- after all when the sun is there, you can't see the stars and yes, indeed, the crescent moon should be the other way if it were the sun. IceDragon64 (talk) 22:57, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  If that be a Crescent, then the other be a Full Moon 

message: This really needs enhancing and updating. We need to show Schlosser's views more fully, but also those of the other main players. The German version has some stuff we don't have.
It has Miranda Aldhouse Green's views, using  as a source so I guess that can be more or less copied from there, but they are fairly old.
The Zur Navigation springenZum Content springenLandesamt für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt / Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte has lot of information - view it in Chrome and you'll get an automatic translation of the pages.
There's quite a few bad sources on Google, but  is The Oxford Handbook of the European Bronze Age with a short bit by Harald Meller, one of the major researchers as well as comments by other authors. It adds a 5th phase when it was "irrevocably removed from circulation".   There's a 2011 paper by Schlosser.  Google scholar has more. Dougweller (talk) 14:27, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs updating 

message: In the section about Discovery a statement is made that the orientation makes the sun set behind a particular mountain- surely it is the location of the site, not the orientation that does this?  I might have changed it myself, but I think the whole statement should be removed as irrelevant to this article about the skydisc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IceDragon64 (talk • contribs) 22:04, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  That section is astronomically illiterate in every way.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.21.28 (talk • contribs)  21:55, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discovery -location not orientation and relevence 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Nebra sky disk. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719051336/http://www.kalkriese.de/Himmelsscheibe_von_Nebra.html to http://www.kalkriese.de/Himmelsscheibe_von_Nebra.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:01, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The State Office for Monument Preservation and Archeology Saxony-Anhalt h as issued the following press release.
"In an article by Rupert Gebhard and Rüdiger Krause, published today in the journal "Archäologische Informations", it is postulated that the Nebra Sky Disc, which is dated to the Early Bronze Age (around 1600 BC), would only be dated 1000 years later to the Iron Age. The colleagues not only ignore the abundance of published research results in recent years, their various arguments also are easily refuted.
Gebhard and Krause put forward several key points as a platform for this thesis.
In particular, the correlation of the Sky Disc with the other discoveries of the hoard, whose Bronze Age age is not in question, is put in doubt. Claims are that the soil attachments on the Sky Disc do not correspond with those of the other findings and that the geochemical analyzes of the metals do not support their coherence.
Both of these statements are demonstrably incorrect. According to an essay by Dr. Jörg Adam (then State Office of Criminal Investigation of Brandenburg), who conducted the investigations of the soil attachments for the Regional Court of Halle as an expert, and who was not quoted by the two authors, "altogether ... therefore an origin of both the soil attachments on the Sky Disc (Sp 1) and on the sword (Sp 2) from their presumed location (the extraction point of VM 1) is to be regarded as very probable ... An exceptional position is occupied by the soil attachments on the ax (column 3). A large proportion of the properties and characteristics determined, also indicate that the origin of these soil attachments from the Mittelberg appear probable «. Since the inquiry of the court of first instance was limited to these three objects back then, the other accompanying findings were not examined by the expert at the time and therefore should not be used as an argument against the coherence of all the finds. In view of this, the claim of the two authors that the chisel must be separated as not belonging to the hoard, is not comprehensible.
Furthermore, the statement that the geochemical analysis of the metals argues against the coherence of the findings is misleading. Already in 2008 and 2010 Prof. Dr. Ernst Pernicka and other colleagues demonstrated "that the copper of all parts of the hoard comes from the same storage location". The Mitterberg in the Salzburg region has long been proven to be a deposit whose copper production ended at the beginning of the 1st millennium BC. In addition, Pernicka states: "Analyzes of Celtic [Iron Age] copper alloys show quite different compositions of the main components as well as trace elements and lead isotope ratios". Therefore, from a metallurgical point of view, dating the Sky Disc to the Iron Age is clearly out of the question.
A final argument put forward by Gebhard and Krause is that the Nebra Sky Disc appeared as "a perfect foreign object" in the symbolism of that period. While this is true, this also applies to every unique discovery. The Sky Disc of Nebra would be a foreign object in any prehistoric period.
:: That is a logical fallacy founded on a circular argument.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.21.28 (talk • contribs) 06:18, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  DIspute over new dating 

message: That makes absolutely no sense and is evidence of astronomical illiteracy. The 2 solstices differ fundamentally, and at the winter solstice, the sun cannot possibly set in the north-west.
:Please sign your posts with four tildes ~ Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:59, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: The enclosure is oriented in such a way that the sun seems to set every solstice behind the Brocken ... some 80 km to the north-west

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: moved   -- Calidum 18:51, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Nebra sky disk →  – The whole article is written in British English, and disc is the common British spelling used in most non-US sources e.g. BBC, i News, Art Newspaper. Other sources such as  use both spellings inconsistently, but it makes no sense for an article title to use US terminology, but the article itself to use UK spellings. As the artifact is from Germany, we would usually default to UK spellings (as Western Europe generally use British English). Joseph2302 (talk) 11:43, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

text: *Support. Spelling consistent with article content. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:50, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 18 October 2021 

message: I added an interpretation of the arc, and referred to my letter published Nov 2021 in Physics Today, it addresses some of the issues raised in the discussion OR RMMentock (talk) 01:44, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aurora Borealis 

message: "The hoard changed hands, probably several times, within Germany during the next two years, being sold ...". Who all were these? And What happened to all of these? Thank you! Misty MH (talk) 18:00, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who all, and What happened to all of the people where it "changed hands"?