Talk:Lewis Binford

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Update, 2003: Lewis Binford now teaches at Truman State University, in Kirksville, MO.

Update, April 2006: A search of their department online does not show him. On the other hand, South Methodist University lists him as emeritus. Kdammers 09:08, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, as of 2003 he was teaching there [1], but only on a casual and part-time basis; he is married to Amber Johnson, the chair of the department, and has worked at Truman at mutual convenience in his retirement...;though mostly in the way of guest lectures and presentations, etc. I do not think it would be fully accurate to represent him as a member of the university's faculty. DavidOaks (talk) 21:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bad example of POV...[edit]

The statement: "Binford is known for his dogmatism and refusal to accept criticism." No source is given for this statement, no examples adduced.

This is not a statement worthy of an encyclopedia. It clearly shows POV and animus. It should clearly be phrased something like, "Binford is considered by some, especially his rivals, for his supposed dogmatism and refusal to accept criticism." The writer of the article seems to have an axe to grind against Binford.

The article makes no mention of Binford's pioneering work in disproving the long-held dogma that American Indians arrived in America only circa 13,500 BP (the "Clovis" technology dated to 11,500 BCE). Binford has found archeological evidence in Pennsylvania, among other places, that demolishes the absurdly early "Clovis" date. He has dated sites to 18,000 and perhaps even more than 22,000 BP. This is surely more important than taking potshots against Binford. PainMan 18:41, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Of all the archaeology articles we have, the theory ones seem to attract the most partisan editors for some reason. Do please overhaul this one and add what you know. adamsan 19:57, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Painman - Love him or hate him, Binford is among the worlds most notable archaeologists, however, he had nothing whatsoever to do with the Meadowcroft site in Pennsylvania that you are referring to. That was Jim Adovasio. In fact, I don't know of any project on the peopling of North America in which Lewis Binford was involved. Also, you should have edited the POV in the article as you suggested. I'll do it for you. DHBoggs 15:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhere, in our pile of dusty VHS tapes, I have a docu (Discovery Channel, I think, or maybe TLC) interviewing Binford in connection with the Meadowcroft site (and thank you for reminding me of the name). I clearly remember Binford discussing the human hairs which had been found and dated to at least 18,000 BP. But since I can't lay my hands on the source, I certainly won't add it to the article.
PainMan (talk) 13:28, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to let people know where he is. The note on this page about him at Truman is true, to a certain degree. He does not teach at Truman State University, but his current wife, Dr. Amber Johnson, does. I am a recent graduate (2006) of Truman State in Kirksville, Missouri and Dr. Johnson was my advisor. Dr. Binford's work features heavily in her classes, and he even comes in sometimes to present on the day's topic. So he is in Kirksville, but he doesn't teach. Hope that helps anyone looking for him. 75.5.177.158 19:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC) Chris H.[reply]

The first paragraph about L Binford is currently not true: Sally Binford died already. Just thought someone should really clean this sad, biased intro up since L Binford is obviously so important in the field of archaeology. Jfortier (talk) 03:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC) Jana F.[reply]

French pov[edit]

From the French Wik site: Binford est connu pour son dogmatisme et son refus des critiques. Il s'est prononcé et a réagi contre un certain nombre d'écoles de pensée, en particulier l'école post-processuelle, l'école comportementaliste, et les anthropologies symbolique et post-moderne. Pretty storng tobacco!Kdammers 08:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 03:20, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article is too thin.[edit]

Binford is important. Look at Childe's entry. Can't we get something about that size - at least - for Binfornd? (And while I ranting, how about David Clarke's paltry article? Let's beef that up, too !) Kdammers (talk) 00:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Get to work then :D
~ender 2008-04-02 19:03:PM MST

I've added a few more details about Binford and the Francois Bordes debate but this article is still pathetic. I will continue to update as I can, as I'm reading a lot of Binford's early work right now. However, I think this article needs a total overhaul, in particular reordering the text into the subsections. A chronological outline of his research career and changes in ideas would be a lot more useful than the present semi-diatribe on Binford's 'supposed dogmatism.' Zooarchaeo (talk • contribs) 03:15, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Add a redirect[edit]

This article has been on the requested biographies page listed under Lewis R. Binford, please make a redirect at that page to this article.
~ender 2008-04-02 19:04:PM MST

POV material removed[edit]

I've removed several sentences from the article for being, in believe, in violation of the NPOV and sourcing policies.

I realize the old saw about the ferocity of academic debates being in inverse proportion to their intrinsic value is often very true (after all, discovering irrefutable proof that Romans established a colony in persent-day VA in 100 CE would be huge news but it would be worth little in and of itself--tho' obviously a well-written book on the subject could turn into a bestseller, but I doubt it since academics are rarely good writers), but I think we (wikipedia editors, that is) should be careful about taking one side of the other in academic debates, especially where the evidence is often sparse and interpretations change radically over time.

Although Binford's thought has shown noticeable development over the years, he has been criticized for his supposed dogmatism and refusal to accept criticism.

This is clearly an editor's opinion as it is not presented (neither is it sourced) as coming from a third-party's book, paper, interview, etc. The problem is more the form rather than the content. If a direct quote could be be adduced, and properly sourced, then I see no problem with the verbiage's inclusion. But as it is, it looks like an editor's judgment.

In particular, although it is clear from reading his work, Binford's concept of archaeology has developed, Binford himself rarely acknowledges this and as a result has been lead into a number of confrontational debates (see 1).

As with the previous edit, this may just be case of the editor not properly sourcing the article or putting into proper format. "One of Bindford's colleagues, Dr X. YZ, notes, "It is clear from reading his work...(ref)Interview with with X. YZ, Phd, "Lewis Binford's Methodologies"...(ref).

The statement "Binford rarely acknowledges this" also lacks proper foundation. Who says he "rarely acknowledges" this? Which publications, interviews, etc, are the ones where he has acknowledged [the development of his concept of archaeology]?

Until an editor provides proper sourcing, and NPOV wording, I believe these sentences are best excised.

PainMan (talk) 13:52, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Broken link[edit]

The link http://www.smu.edu/ANTHRO/faculty/lBinford/lBinford.htm at the bottom of the page doesn't work anymore. I looked around for the current url, but I couldn't find it immediately. Tannermyoung (talk) 18:53, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Personal life[edit]

There are some very... interesting, insights into Binford's personality and personal life in this interview with Sally Binford. I'm not sure how, or if, they should be incorporated though. It's a primary source, and there are obviously great big flashing POV issues. —Joseph RoeTk•Cb, 15:32, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Binford Marriages[edit]

Five or six wives?

Article currently states, "Sally Binford has stated that Binford had been married twice before she met him" without citation. Since Sally is now long deceased, this is not a personal communication, but is hearsay. What is the source of this information? This should be cleared up by reference to the family, his first wife and daughter are still alive and would probably know. Otherwise this reads awkward and is extraneous.

67.61.52.198 (talk) 08:19, 14 May 2011 (UTC) John D. Hays / jdhays@hayspc.com[reply]

I've added a reference for the claim, the link I posted above. It's not the most reliable, I'll admit – an interview in a self-published book reprinted on a blog, but I think it should do for one relatively uncontentious statement of fact. Yes, more certainty would be better, but as it stands I don't think think the section is awkward or extraneous; it does a good job of summarising only a few passing mentions of Binford's personal life in reliable sources. What his family knows is irrelevant, unless they've put it in print.   jroe tkcb  08:46, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lewis binford.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Lewis binford.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lewis Binford and coleagues in the field in Alaska 1969.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Lewis Binford and coleagues in the field in Alaska 1969.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:28, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lewis Binford. 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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:04, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lewis_Binford&oldid=1194041870"