Talk:Prehistoric Iberia/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Prehistoric Iberia. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
This is the archive of the old Prehistoric Portugal talk page.
Clean up
This article is a partial copy of Timeline of Portuguese history (Pre-Roman). It urgently needs proper text. This kind of article is bad within a concept of a free encyclopedia as both articles will develop independently. Please help turning the chronology into a normal article. Thanks. Gameiro 01:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Merge with Prehistorc Spain & move to Prehistoric Iberia
I propose that this article be merged with Prehistoric Spain & moved to Prehistoric Iberia. I explain my reasoning here here. Jimp 05:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- I perfectly understand you reasoning, and tend to agree... but, however, must countries have an article in Wikipedia about their prehistoric time. Why should Iberia be different? Furthermore, even if there is a lot of overlapping an mutual scholarship, there is also a lot of diffeentited national research, dealing with topics that do not affect both countries. Therefore I disagree with you merge proposal. Sorry... The Ogre 17:51, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Hello Jim. If the merge goes through, what shall we do with Pre-Roman Portugal? You see, Prehistoric Spain encompasses a period that the "Portuguese" articles differentiated into Prehistoric Portugal and Pre-Roman Portugal. Should we merge them all? The Ogre 13:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
So?
What's the status and outcome of this discussion. I began being against the proposed merge, but know I'm for it. Does anyone want a vote? The Ogre 17:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- I also believe that Pre-Roman Portugal should be also merged. The Ogre 17:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Move?
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: page moved. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:05, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
User:Cattus/php → Prehistoric Portugal –
- User:Cattus contacted me wanting this move because:-
- "if you look at the Prehistoric Iberia, most of it is not about Prehistoric Portugal. Understandably, most of the article is about the territory that is now Spain, since most of the Iberian Peninsula is part of Spain. That means there is very little about the prehistory of waht is now Portugal in that article, and if I were to expand it to give it as much atention as Spain's prehistory it would be undue weight. Olher than that, there are plenty of reliable sources about the prehistory of Portugal to create an article>". Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:28, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
To add to the article
Remerge
This was merged to Prehistoric Iberia. Why has it resurfaced? There was no Portugal in prehistoric times. JIMp talk·cont 11:37, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
- This article was merged with Prehistoric Spain six years ago. Now it has been recreated without addressing the reasons for the merging in the first place. In fact, as far as I'm aware, no discussion was given at all. The original merge was thoroughly discussed and voted on and there was a broad consensus to merge. Without going into too much detail, I'll summarise the essence of the argument to merge: neither Spain nor Portugal existed in prehistoric times. Unless there is a good reason to overturn the 2007 consensus to merge, I think it still stands and so propose merging this current version into Prehistoric Iberia again. JIMp talk·cont 07:31, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
- I fail to see your point. Countless articles exist, see Prehistoric Scotland and Prehistoric Britain. People will want to known stuff in more detail considering a specific area. The state didn't existed in prehistoric times, but the land did. Moreover between prehistory and history, there's protohistory in Portugal and Spain. The fact that the article is poor and lack content, with half of the current article is actually about protohistory, doesn't mean it will always be like this, we hope not. There is a lot that can be added to the article, for instance issues considering the neanderthals, findings and other studies.--Pedro (talk) 09:29, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
- My point is simply this. There was no Portugal in prehistoric times (nor in protohostoric times for that matter) so there never was a prehistoric Portugal. There was, however, a prehistoric Iberia. It makes perfect sense to write of Iberia in prehistory because were talking of a region which had geographic significance in those times. People will want detail about specific a area you say. Yes, I agree, they will (except they probably want not a specific area but several specific areas). However, dividing prehistoric Iberia up along modern political lines seems like organising library books according to the colour of their cover. Divide the peninsula along lines which actually make archæological sense. Before we divide it up, though, we should probably want to actually have some detail to give; as you note, the content is currently lacking. If this is the way to go, and I say it is, then it doesn't matter how many other articles are doing it differently, they should follow our lead, let Prehistoric Scotland (and Prehistoric Wales) be merged into Prehistoric Britain (note that Prehistoric England already redirects there). JIMp talk·cont 12:43, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- I believe Prehistoric Portugal should be merged with Prehistoric Iberia. I understand what Pedro is saying, but Iberia is the proper term to use when referring to the prehistoric area of present-day Portugal and Spain. Afro-Eurasian (talk) 01:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- Since bringing this up nothing has been added to the article. Instead a lot has been removed. Is there anything to add, though? If there is, add it to Prehistoric Iberia where this article is to be merged. Jimp 08:49, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
- I believe Prehistoric Portugal should be merged with Prehistoric Iberia. I understand what Pedro is saying, but Iberia is the proper term to use when referring to the prehistoric area of present-day Portugal and Spain. Afro-Eurasian (talk) 01:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- My point is simply this. There was no Portugal in prehistoric times (nor in protohostoric times for that matter) so there never was a prehistoric Portugal. There was, however, a prehistoric Iberia. It makes perfect sense to write of Iberia in prehistory because were talking of a region which had geographic significance in those times. People will want detail about specific a area you say. Yes, I agree, they will (except they probably want not a specific area but several specific areas). However, dividing prehistoric Iberia up along modern political lines seems like organising library books according to the colour of their cover. Divide the peninsula along lines which actually make archæological sense. Before we divide it up, though, we should probably want to actually have some detail to give; as you note, the content is currently lacking. If this is the way to go, and I say it is, then it doesn't matter how many other articles are doing it differently, they should follow our lead, let Prehistoric Scotland (and Prehistoric Wales) be merged into Prehistoric Britain (note that Prehistoric England already redirects there). JIMp talk·cont 12:43, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- I fail to see your point. Countless articles exist, see Prehistoric Scotland and Prehistoric Britain. People will want to known stuff in more detail considering a specific area. The state didn't existed in prehistoric times, but the land did. Moreover between prehistory and history, there's protohistory in Portugal and Spain. The fact that the article is poor and lack content, with half of the current article is actually about protohistory, doesn't mean it will always be like this, we hope not. There is a lot that can be added to the article, for instance issues considering the neanderthals, findings and other studies.--Pedro (talk) 09:29, 31 January 2013 (UTC)