Talk:Neolithic Revolution

Anthropology High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Archaeology Top‑importance

	This article 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.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology

History High‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index

Archive 1

Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Linear progression of society

The part of the introduction about the neolithic package and how farming gave rise to hierarchy just isnt true? Hierarchy can exist both with and without hierarchy. The opening also implies that farming, once adopted, was a permanent feature, something that's not always reflected. Amending some of the phrasing here and later on would more accurately reflect the ways that agriculture changed societies, and help resist the idea that history only moves one way. Bookyteeth (talk) 15:13, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An amendment made on 28 August 2017 by User:Chiswick Chap removed the statement "Personal land and private property ownership led to a hierarchical society, with an elite social class, comprising a nobility, polity, and military" from the lead section, without an edit summary but presumably because the statement was inadequately supported by citations. The words "hierarchical ideologies" remained, without citation, presumably overlooked then and ever since. I agree that this requires a citation and have flagged it as such. Don't know what User:Bookyteeth means by "Hierarchy can exist both with and without hierarchy". Masato.harada (talk) 16:16, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, meant "hierarchy can exist both with and without farming" Bookyteeth (talk) 00:12, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BP

Why is BP (a relatively unknown standard) used? 197.234.165.147 (talk) 18:21, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because it concerns prehistory. Before Present is standard in such cases. Dimadick (talk) 00:57, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would be truer to say it it is often preferred in such cases, further back than some cut-off point. I wouldn't expect to see it used for the European Bronze Age for example. This topic is about at the borderline imo. Johnbod (talk) 03:59, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While its usage may be common, it is bad practice when multiple chronological are referenced as it requires doing additional mental math using a yearly shifting reference point and is not used in ancient and prehistoric academic chronologies. For example, the chronology of Egyptian dynasties are much easier to understand using the BCE standard. Eulersidentity (talk) 16:45, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Change proposal to chronological era standard

The usage of the BP scale has a yearly shift in reference point that is better suited for geological scale chronologies but poorly suited for the chronology of human histories. The academic standard of using the BCE scale is used to address this by using a fixed reference point to make this chronology easier to intuitively understand, store, and recall from memory.

As a result, I propose keeping BP for references to geological epochs in the article such as the beginning of the Holocene era, but changing the chronological scale for references to human history and its corresponding archaeological record to BCE.

Please let me know your thoughts and declare whether or not you support or oppose this proposal to determine whether or not to accept or reject it by consensus.

Thanks! Eulersidentity (talk) 17:06, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]