Talk:Taforalt

Suggested move

Any else think the article can be moved to just Taforalt ? The title now has some unnecessary language. DaltonCastle (talk) 05:03, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

@DaltonCastle: Yes. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:10, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Or should we REDIRECT to Taforalt Caves. It appears a merger may be better suited. DaltonCastle (talk) 22:17, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello all, I'm currently editing this article for a graduate course. I would argue against the removal of the "(Grotte des Pigeons)" portion of the title as the vast majority of the research that has taken place at this site over the last 60 years has routinely referred to the location using the entire name. Also, "Taforalt Caves" would be misleading as there is only one archaeologically significant cave by Taforalt with Taforalt actually being the name of the village nearest to the cave which would, I imagine, create further issues if the title of the article is shortened to "Taforalt" and someone creates an article on the village at a later point in time. Just my opinion based on the research I've been doing, I of course will respect your expertise in the Wiki-world if you disagree. I'll be updating the page itself throughout the rest of the day, removing the extensive block quotes and expanding on the information regarding the pre-Iberomaurusian occupation on the site (Aterian-Mousterian) and providing a summary on the most recent excavations. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. I've never really used the talk page before so I'm not sure what code I need to be filling in besides the final four tildes so I apologize ahead of time for the formatting here. Archaeologyhunter (talk) 22:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Lazaridis et al. Sub saharan african

The earlier text stated that according to the paper by Lazaridis Taforalt could be better seen as a mix between a Dzudzuana component and a sub saharan component. This is not in the paper. In fact the paper mentions that the unknown sub saharan component previously found, related to the Yoruba was actually Taforalt DNA in Yoruba, so the exact other way round. The entire paper does not mention a Sub-saharan component. LouisBStevenson (talk) 19:21, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Dating section

In excerpted text below, the author is trying to be cute and the sentence is almost impossible to decode. I believe they are saying that less Quercus is found in upper layers, and that though it is still found, the ratio has shifted to include a higher amount of Cedrus and a lower amount of Quercus. Mapping out the weird sentence; "Quercus has declined at the expense of Cedrus", that makes me question my interpretation. Cedrus' expense implies Cedrus has lost out... and that doesn't make any sense at all in this context, but losing out implies less.

"In particular, the vegetation excavated by Barton in Group E is dominated by the presence of Cedrus atlantica and deciduous Quercus, with the latter declining at the expense of Cedrus."

75.86.101.79 (talk) 16:58, 8 October 2024 (UTC)