Talk:Archaeology of Iowa

Archaeology of Iowa has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 22, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

Indigenous peoples of North America Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America 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.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Iowa Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Iowa portal This article is supported by WikiProject Iowa (assessed as Mid-importance).

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.

Indigenous peoples of the Americas Low‑importance

	Indigenous peoples of the Americas portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indigenous peoples of the Americas 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.Indigenous peoples of the AmericasWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasIndigenous peoples of the Americas articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wikify

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

(Taken from relevant talk pages:)

Hi Funandtrvl- What specific problems did you have with Iowa archaeology? There is a sloppy autogenerated citation (done by someone else) that I am trying to eradicate, but other than that, what do you feel is wrong with the article that it warrants a Wikify tag? Bill Whittaker (talk) 17:46, 8 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi Bill! What I meant by needing to be wikified, is that there are a lot of possible wikilinks that could be added to the article, especially the links for anything to do with history, geology, arch., etc., that are relevant to the content. (For example, anything to do with historical periods or civilizations, like: "Archaic Period" should be wikilinked.) Also, instead of having inline ext. links for the universities, etc., those should be wikilinked and then add an ext. links section with the respective urls. to the bottom of the article. Relevant navboxes, i.e., for "Iowa topics" and/or "Arch. topics" would be great for the bottom of the article. Again, there are more suggestions at: WP:Featured article criteria. Hope this helps! --Funandtrvl (talk) 18:01, 8 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Okay, major overhaul complete, fixed all refs, added tons of wikilinks, added some new citiations, standardized the citation looks and lots of little changes. The page needs to be reevaluated for Class rating; now better than a "C", I believe. Bill Whittaker (talk) 13:27, 9 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This review is transcluded from Talk:Iowa archaeology/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: gergis (talk) 09:09, 22 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for criteria)

Good article, well-referenced and well-illustrated. Satisfies all main Wikipedia style parameters.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
No obvious OR, but requires expert review to fully determine.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Iowa archaeology. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120106152752/http://www.uiowa.edu/~osa/IAM/2007Ioway/blood_run.htm to http://www.uiowa.edu/~osa/IAM/2007Ioway/blood_run.htm

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) 15:15, 12 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Iowa archaeology. 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:

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) 04:37, 16 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic