Talk:List of Stone Age art

Lists High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Visual arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts

Archaeology High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Artists

Something I realized today is that each piece listed should be treated like any other museum quality work of art, and each listing should identify where the piece is now. Those seem obvious now, but I didn't get it fully until today, that this page is an honoring of artists (as all pages on artists are) who happened to live before anyone could write about them. They still probably had opening nights in those caves, or gave tours at some point. They probably played music and danced in most of them. Would have been a lively bunch. Randy Kryn 2:29 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Chinese art

Why is Chinese art from 4000 bc presented as "stone age art"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.235.96.234 (talk • contribs) 11:54, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Stone Age lasted until about 1500 BCE in China. See Neolithic China. – Joe (talk) 15:48, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

quality of the list

in the section "figurines" the first object mentioned is the depiction of a head - no real figurine (sometimes even called a hoax). the second "figurine" is a woman on a kind of throne - also no clear case of a figurine. the most important figurine, the oldest in the world, comes then... time range and region is said to be "Upper Palaeolithic Europe" - although clearly the Mal'ta venus figurines are beyond this range. also the range of neolitic art ("Eastern Europe") is wrong if one is intellectually forced to have "Westray wife" in the list. these are the consequences if somebody does the job of fullfilling the wishes of Johnbod. Well, all in all: the addition of paleolithic and neolithic art seems to be simply useless. Mr. bobby (talk) 10:17, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All I did was restore the items you removed in their original position, Mr. bobby. If you're not happy with the order then feel free to rearrange it. I do think alphabetical is more manageable than a subjective assessment of importance, though.

The introduction I added to the section gives examples of well known prehistoric figurine traditions, not the scope of the list, which is, can I remind you, Stone Age art. The Neolithic is part of the Stone Age. You will have to explain what you understand by "figurine" because no sense of the term I know excludes heads or people on chairs. – Joe (talk) 10:52, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

the head once was "Venus figurines", referring to the paleolitic. and i deleted the non-paleolithic stuff below this category. you change things without thinking. Mr. bobby (talk) 11:16, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My thinking was that slightly adjusting the section heading to be more inclusive made more sense than completely removing items that are within the scope of the list as a whole. – Joe (talk) 11:54, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

changing headings more inclusive? there are thousands of neolithic art works. and westray wife is here to stay! whoever feels like adding something should do it. we'll have a long list here...we should think about a list of useless lists, now.Mr. bobby (talk) 12:33, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

figurine: a clear case is the depiction of the body of one human or animal. not just parts of the body, not grops, not arrangements, not combinations of humans and animals and so on. do your work. it so inclusive. Mr. bobby (talk) 12:33, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That is a strange definition. It seems rather unworkable given the tendency of things to break when they've been buried for thousands of years. Do you have a source? Bailey's Prehistoric Figurines and Insoll's Handbook both include sculptures of body parts and seated figures. – Joe (talk) 13:21, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Although I haven't gone through them all it looks like some good recent changes, although a bit technical in nature (please remember that this is basically a visual arts project page of art by uncredited Stone Age painters and sculptors). How about removing the boldfaced dates and use dates that an average reader will understand? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for coming to talk. This is a WP:LIST article, it is not "an visual arts page for the average reader", this isn't something Wikipedia does. You may be looking for commons galleries, or for simple. List articles aren't intended as "introductions" for the "general reader", they are supposed to be summarized information. If you don't like the boldface, or the "kya" format, you are very welcome to change it back to unboldened, or to "years ago", no problem. The important thing is that the page doesn't nilly-willy conflate 40,000 year old art with 2,000 year old art just because "stone age" is an insanely broad term. --dab (𒁳) 11:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the changes by dates are helpful and work well, although a bit more technical looking. This list can be both a list article and a visual arts page in non-technical language. The artists of the period have been recognized on the page as artists and not only incidents in the archeological record. A balance can be found. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:25, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Representation of Asian cave art is incomplete

For example, caves in the islands of Sulawesi and Borneo have not been reported in the article. These are some of the oldest known cave art. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.100.188.42 (talk) 05:40, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]