Talk:A History of the World in 100 Objects

topic of interest

I shall be contributing to this article development starting monday, 28th of September. 23:01, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Photos needed

I have made a list of objects still requiring photos or in need of a better photo at the British Museum project page. Any help in clearing this list would be much appreciated. BabelStone (talk) 11:37, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks to Mike Peel for filling in so many of the gaps! BabelStone (talk) 23:37, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I think there were two involved (Redtigerxyz? if I remember right.) Yes this page has come on a lot and is only missing a few. (< 9). Well done Victuallers (talk) 07:40, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Geni's also been taking photos of them, and others have chipped in too. It's nice that we've now got a complete run of photos up to 73. Hopefully we can get it completed and put the page in for Wikipedia:Featured List status some time (note how empty the history section of that page is - and how full the sports section is...). Mike Peel (talk) 08:09, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, of course, many thanks to everyone who took photos or uploaded images. Now that we have most of the images needed, maybe it would be a good time to start improving the text to try and get it up to FL status. BabelStone (talk) 12:10, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

C'mon guys - only four more needed! 81.157.193.212 (talk) 17:04, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Note that per WP:NFC we probably can't use the picture of Hockney's In the Dull Village here, so I've removed it again. As non-free copyrighted content, we can use the pic in the article that is actually on the image itself; but not just to decorate a list in which the picture happens to be mentioned. Jheald (talk) 17:41, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Featured List ?

I think the article is looking pretty good now, and we have images of all the objects we can show, so I think it may be ready to put forward for FL status. Thoughts? BabelStone (talk) 22:37, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

There are a couple of objects in the wrong category (for instance the Mummy of Hornedjitef is in the 2 mill-9 thou year ago allinea) Same with the Maize God statue from Honduras

Links on Transcripts?

There are transcripts of the podcasts. Example: http://www.bbc.co.uk/ahistoryoftheworld/about/transcripts/episode1/ Could there be a link to each transcript in the table? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.0.19.34 (talk) 22:50, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure where we could put a link to the transcripts, as adding an extra column to the tables would probably make them too wide. And as there is a prominent link to the episode transcript from each BBC episode page, which is already linked to in the BBC column, I'm not convinced that there is a need to add a direct link to the transcript. BabelStone (talk) 22:11, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

No articles about Objects No 99 and 100?

I cannot find articles about Objects No 99, the "Sharia compliant Visa Credit card", and No 100, the "Solar-powered lamp and charger", not even by browsing through the navigation tool (which appears to end apruptely at No 98:

--NearEMPTiness (talk) 16:08, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Because there are no specific articles on these objects. These two specific items are not notable enough for a dedicated Wikipedia article (of course you are always welcome to write one). BabelStone (talk) 20:24, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on A History of the World in 100 Objects. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/canberra-life/new-exhibition-opening-at-the-national-museum-of-australia-in-canberra-tells-the-history-of-two-million-years-in-100-objects-20160823-gqz91p.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-08/two-million-years-of-human-history-national-museum-canberra/7826960
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100608012308/https://www.finearts.utexas.edu/aah/art_history/faculty/bourget.cfm to http://www.finearts.utexas.edu/aah/art_history/faculty/bourget.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:56, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Variations

I saw the touring exhibition in Canberra in January 2017. Interestingly, the exhibition I saw was very similar, but not identical to the list in this article. Item 100 was the original experimental equipment used by Dr. J. O'Sullivan in his key developments towards WiFi. I'm pretty sure the Centaur and Lapith sculpture wasn't there; however there was a very impressive sculpture in-the-round of Mithras killing the bull. 202.63.39.58 (talk) 01:43, 17 January 2018 (UTC) More interested in the fact that there IS a touring exhibition in 2018 in Australia. Got a pic and a reference? Why not add that to the article. Victuallers (talk) 11:49, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Dates BC > BCE

Academic practice, especially in studies that span cultures, seems to be to refer to BCE (before the Christian era) rather than BC; and CE (Christian Era) rather than AD ('Year of Our Lord'). Any Wikipedia policy on this? I would like to change it, since Christianity is such a minor part of the 100-object series. Eteb3 (talk) 17:39, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose The policy is WP:ERA. This is especially inappropriate given the BM still uses BC, as do many museums, especially in material intended for a wide public. You will find there's not much appetite for changing established ERA styles. That "Academic practice, especially in studies that span cultures, seems to be to refer to BCE" is somewhat dubious - especially in that it is more common in the US than UK. Johnbod (talk) 18:00, 8 November 2020 (UTC)