Template talk:Did you know/Ridgeway Site

Ridgeway Site

Archived nomination

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Crisco 1492 (talk)

• ... that the Ridgeway Site is the type site for the Glacial Kame Culture?

• Reviewed: Eynesbury Rovers F.C.

Created by Nyttend (talk). Self nom at 02:03, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

• A snippet of the book appearing on Google Books implies that there are at least two Ohio type sites for Glacial Kame Culture, one being in Hardin County and the other in Logan County. Article length and date are good. Referencing is good. Writing style cannot be judged for copyvio because of offline source. Binksternet (talk) 16:45, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

• Snippet of what book? I'm familiar with several Logan County sites; the premier one is the Williams Site near Russells Point (along with the Duff Site southwest of Belle Center and a site near the McColly Covered Bridge in Bloomfield Township, but they're of lesser importance), but if I understand rightly, Williams was discovered long afterward. Ridgeway was the only Glacial Kame site known for several decades; all others have been identified from it. FYI, the bits derived from Cunningham couldn't be copyvio, since the book itself is PD-US-no notice; however, I rewrote them as I would any copyrighted source. Nyttend (talk) 17:44, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

• The snippet was from Converse's book "The Archaeology of Ohio", on page 110. It says, "The type sites for Glacial Kame are situated in Logan and Hardin counties in Ohio..." That's why I concluded (with absolutely no subject expertise) that the hook could be inaccurate, by representing only one type site when the cited expert says there are more. Binksternet (talk) 17:59, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

• Hm, interesting; I'll check it when I get back from work; I was on lunch break at 17:44, and I'm at the library now. Thanks for the pointer; I don't remember seeing this. Nyttend backup (talk) 21:06, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

• Oops, sorry, I forgot to check this last night. Cultures can have multiple type sites in one sense — for example, the Spring Creek Site is a type site for a specific sort of Ottawa pottery, and presumably there are type sites for other sorts of Ottawa pottery, so it can be said that there are multiple type sites affiliated with the Ottawa. If Google allowed you to see more of the book, you'd be able to realise that Zimmerman is the type site for Glacial Kame pottery, since it's the only site of the culture with any pottery at all, and you'd be able to realise that Williams is the type site for methods of burials, since it's the only major site discovered after photography became common and thus the only one where skeletons were photographed before their removal from the ground. This is all using the phrase rather loosely; in its strictest sense, there can only be one type site for an entire culture — the one that's the basis for the description of the culture in general. That's what Ridgeway is, and that's why it's "the" type site of the culture despite the existence of other type sites that are related to the culture. Finally, please understand that I'm not complaining against you — what I know about this I got from the printed sources I've used, so there's no way for you to have known about all this. Nyttend (talk) 12:20, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

• Okay, good to know about the various levels of type site. Thanks for giving a glimpse of a wider world beyond my Google Books snippet. Hook is good to go! Binksternet (talk) 15:20, 12 August 2011 (UTC)