Talk:Bioarchaeology

message: The term osteoarchaeology simply refers to the remains of bones, whereas "human remains" could refer to so-called "mummies" where more than a skeleton has been preserved. I am in no position to edit this article, yet this confusion could be misleading. (188.74.102.164 (talk) 15:35, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: This article seems to confuse human remains with bones. 

message: There is no obvious reason as to why this needs a separate page. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk  23:49, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Medieval bioarchaeology]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Bioarchaeology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131214043959/http://www.aaanet.org:80/sections/bas/index.html to http://www.aaanet.org/sections/bas/index.html/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:45, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bioarchaeology. 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/20100610011847/http://shesc.asu.edu/bioarchaeology to http://shesc.asu.edu/bioarchaeology
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:54, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bioarchaeology. 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/20101114084318/http://www.africanburialground.gov/abg_main.htm to http://www.africanburialground.gov/ABG_Main.htm
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) 17:47, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Dear Wikipedians,
I have just joined the Wikipedia community and looking forward to work in this environment! This is the first article I am starting on, because it is my field of expertise. It looks really nice, and I am definitely not intending to change a lot content wise, but while reading through it, it struck me that the order of topics could be improved a little (most importantly I would like to start with paleodemography instead of paleopathology, as this is the order students usually get taught), so I will be changing little bits throughout the upcoming days, I will be happy to hear your feedback!
Cheers,
Anne-Marijn  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anne-Marijn (talk • contribs) 15:01, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article order could be restructured 

message: I am not an expert in this field. The reference given in the article turned out to be misleading. The author did not understand the old excavation numbering system. A better, other example is needed here. I added a further note where Mann's mistakes are discussesd. -- Udimu (talk) 10:43, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bioarchaeological sexing of skeletons is not error-proof. 

message: Hi, 
I just wanted to let you know that your article was reviewed, and your peer review was completed last night!
Regards, 
Payton  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Payton.dawson (talk • contribs) 16:03, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completed Peer Review  

message: Hi all! I have submitted an entry on historical bioarchaeology. Some of the content may be common with bioarchaeology obviously, but I believe it should have an entry of its own as there is more additional content to support one. What do you think?
Best, Anna  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anna karligkioti (talk • contribs) 10:59, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable in the field to express a firm opinion either way, but note that there is also an existing article on Medieval bioarchaeology, which again overlaps in part with both this article and with the proposed "Historical bioarchaeology" article. Obviously, "Medieval bioarchaeology" is a European concept, whereas "Historical bioarchaeology" is perhaps more North American. (Does anyone talk about "Post-medieval bioarchaeology", by analogy with Post-medieval archaeology? I don't know.) I assume that in all 3 fields the basic techniques and principles remain similar, but the amount of supplementary information provided by contextual documentary evidence varies widely. For that reason, I think there probably is a case for having all 3 articles, but if so we need to keep the duplication to a minimum, and to provide clear links to the other articles where appropriate. GrindtXX (talk) 13:43, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split request for Historical bioarchaeology 

message: I found the content in the 'Bioarchaeological treatments of equality and inequality' section to be confusingly organized - there's good content in there but it's strung together poorly - I think better effort could be put into connecting some of the points made and giving this section a cohesive argument arc. I also think that biocultural bioanthropology bit could be framed separately under a different sub-heading as a theoretical approach (this article needs a section about theoretical approaches in bioarchaeology) and then just referenced in the 'equality and inequality' section. The same goes for the small paragraph on the bioarchaeology of violence, which could have its own article, if not at least its own sub-heading. I also think this section would benefit from slightly updated references, as I'm noticing most of what's included is >10 years old. 
As far as 'Archaeological ethics' goes, I think the title of the section is a bit misleading - wouldn't 'Bioarchaeological Ethics' be more fitting? Furthermore, the only thing really discussed in this section is NAGPRA when in reality the ethics of bioarchaeology as a discipline are so much more complex, and have been heavily published upon in the past 10 or so years. Some references to start would be: , , 
Bioarchaeo (talk) 03:32, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review commentary on 'Bioarchaeological treatments of equality and inequality' and 'Archaeological ethics'  

message: I am a graduate student at Caltech. I am going to add a lot of new information into the Stable Isotope section of this article. There are a few things that I will be changing and omitting, but feel free to edit or change anything back if needed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmariemueller (talk • contribs) 07:57, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Stable Isotope Biogeochemistry 2022