Talk:Neolithic architecture

Architecture Top‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

This is a rather strange article which contradicts itself, beginning by stating that neolithic "architecture" pre-dates written history, then going on to speak of written eyewitness accounts. I don't want to be dismissive, but the last paragraph seems more or less irrelevant. I propose to delete it unless the author would like to explain a bit more clearly what the intention of the article is, and demonstrate that it doesn't infringe the NPOV rule. Deb 23:11 Jan 31, 2003 (UTC)

What is the NPOV rule?Kar 13:36 Feb 1, 2003 (UTC)

Hello, Kar. Nice to meet you. The NPOV rule means that all articles must keep to a "neutral point of view" -- in other words, they should be limited to facts and not personal opinions. That doesn't mean that you can't include ideas you personally believe in, as long as you are careful how you phrase them. For example, in this article (which I'm assuming you wrote), you refer to the Old Testament as a historical document. I think a lot of people would dispute that it is historically accurate and would describe it as a collection of fictional stories used by ancient people to explain things they didn't understand. However, if you believe that it is true, you can still say that "Many people believe that the Old Testament is a historical document" and go on to cite the evidence for this. I think what you've already written is very interesting, but it will undoubtedly be altered - not necessarily by me, as I am a Christian and respect fundamentalist beliefs which I don't share, but by people who don't accept what you say. So you need to be careful how you say it. Deb 17:40 Feb 1, 2003 (UTC)

End of Neolithic level in the Americas[edit]

Regarding this statement: "The people of the Americas and the Pacific remained at the Neolithic level of technology up until the time of European contact, including very small exceptions (a few copper hatchets and spear heads in the Great Lakes region).[citation needed]"

I might be misunderstanding it, my English is pretty basic. But I think is not right, according to this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallurgy_in_pre-Columbian_America

Indigenous South Americans had full metallurgy with smelting and various metals being purposely alloyed. Some of them might be considered Bronze age technologies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.28.245.98 (talk) 17:27, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]