Talk:Dennis E. Puleston

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

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

Untitled

Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello,

I believe I have addressed the note on this page. If there is more to do, I need to do it this weekend. This is a plea for specific help or the clearence of the notes attached to the page. Please help me get this remedied. It is not only an important subject, but also a big grade in a graduate level class. (Cakerkela (talk) 00:53, 18 November 2011 (UTC))Reply

I left a message on my talk page, and removed most of the tags. Keep in mind, Wikipedia isn't a platform for better grades, it is an encyclopedia and we have a very specific tone, which may or may not be the same as you are shooting for in your school project. For instance, we don't allow essays on Wikipedia. Please read WP:NOT for more clarity than I can muster. Dennis Brown (talk) 01:08, 18 November 2011 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for the help. Through reading the WP:NOT page, I believe that the remaining issues must lie in the depth of the material covered (specifically in the ramon study section. As one who is actively engaged in follow up work on the subject, i am having a difficult time deciding on what can be removed without marginalizing Puleston's argument -- one that is unique and influences much of the field of archaeology. I will try to trim it down this weekend, but I could use any help that anyone reading could give on this matter. (Cakerkela (talk) 14:42, 18 November 2011 (UTC))Reply

Add topic