Template:Did you know nominations/Lawrence H. Keeley

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:40, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Lawrence H. Keeley

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that archaeologist Lawrence H. Keeley refined the methods of microscopic use-wear analysis to learn about prehistoric stone tools? Source: "In the 1970s, Lawrence H. Keeley refined the 'high power' technique for microwear analysis that had been pioneered by S. A. Semenov. Lawrence Keeley demonstrated to the Western world that the 'Semenov high power method' of identifying the functions of ancient stone tools is a very effective analytical technique." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352409X19302275
  • ALT1: ... that Lawrence H. Keeley, an American archaeologist, worked with Nicholas Toth to research Paleolithic tools from Koobi Fora, Kenya? Source: "Keeley and Toth's study of microwear traces on stone tools supported the results of independent studies of cut-marks on bones from basal Paleolithic sites that suggested that Plio-Pleistocene hominins were hunters or scavengers who were able to kill small game or drive off predators and collect nearly complete carcasses. In addition, the Koobi Fora artifacts provide the only direct evidence for woodworking and plant cutting by hominins during the Pliocene-Pleistocene." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352409X19302275
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Franco-Greek defense agreement

Created by Nmarshall25 (talk). Self-nominated at 19:49, 22 May 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Good to go. Main hook preferred. ALT1 is cited, but not to the source supplied in the nomination. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:43, 22 May 2022 (UTC)