Talk:Ubaid period

Iraq Mid‑importance

	Iraq portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq 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.IraqWikipedia:WikiProject IraqTemplate:WikiProject IraqIraq articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ancient Near East B‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East related articles 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.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East articles
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archaeology B‑class Mid‑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
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Why does Ubaid 3 start year fall after Ubaid 2?[edit]

Wondering if this is an error.^

Reverting to "BC" style[edit]

This article has had only two major contributors: its originator, 155.97.8.73 (16:49, 12 December 2003), and John D. Croft (00:32, 19 February 2006), who contributed somewhat the greater amount. Both of them used "BC" style, and the article was written in that style until 16:20, 25 February 2006, when 85.77.105.226 switched it to "BCE" style (without even leaving an edit summary). This was clearly a no-no by the "don't mess with it" ruling about style disputes, established eight months earlier. So I have reversed the illegitimate style-change. -- Lonewolf BC 03:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Radiocarbon dates[edit]

I've reverted this edit. I don't believe the chronology of Ubaid as given in the article is based solely on radiocarbon dating (consider TL dating on the pottery from the late period), and if the chronology can be pushed back more than 800 years than the traditional dates given, then it should be no problem to directly source scholarly material on Ubaid giving the modified dates. However, giving the dates as found in the article's references, and then saying "use this web calculator or table to get the true dates" is original research. Brando130 (talk) 08:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Site vs Period[edit]

Rather than create a new article for the al-Ubaid site, I'm just going to add a few refs, a coord, and a Archaeology section to the Ubaid Period article and leave the redirect as it is, unless someone thinks this is silly.Ploversegg (talk) 17:43, 13 April 2009 (UTC)ploversegg[reply]

Please explain reasons for edit[edit]

Zoeperkoe, can you please explain the reasons for your edit. Many thanks. John D. Croft (talk) 05:58, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Ubaid period and Tell Ubaid are not the same. Just like the Halaf period is not the same as Tell Halaf, the Jemdet Nasr period is not the same as Jemdet Nasr, the Uruk period is not the same as Uruk, and so forth. Halaf, Jemdet Nasr and Uruk already have separate articles for period and type-site, separating those for Ubaid as well is the consistent thing to do.--Zoeperkoe (talk) 06:35, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ubaid period. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080910214744/http://www.gulfnexus.org/articles/geo/2006a%20Parker%20et%20al.pdf to http://www.gulfnexus.org/articles/geo/2006a%20Parker%20et%20al.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:19, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Later periods of Ubaid[edit]

The later chronology was somewhat confused, and I tried my best to clarify. Also adjusted some headings. In my view, the regional character of Ubaid should be explained some more. In different regions it had a different character. Y-barton (talk) 00:41, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maps missing markups in full view[edit]

When I click on any of the maps, the overlay text showing city names and locations are not shown. The small view shows the cities, the big view does not. Seeing only the mountains and waters is not useful for learning about ancient civilizations, need to see the actual ancient civilizations also on the map. If it requires a secret handshake to display it in the "correct way", then i bet most Wikipedia readers are not trained to know it. This affects the Mesopotamia image with cities, and the larger Eurasia image with the contemporary civilizations. 35.141.31.136 (talk) 18:18, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]