This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Stonehenge article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies |
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 100 days ![]() |
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | Stonehenge was a History good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org
|
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I would like to propose a blanket change from BC to BCE throughout the article when referencing dating. BeefsteakMaters (talk) 17:47, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Predates anything the Romans did... what? The Roman Empire was founded in 27 BCE. The anno domini calendar was devised in 525 CE and didn't come into widespread use until the 8th century. – Joe (talk) 14:24, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
What was in the mind of them??? 103.54.101.15 (talk) 09:52, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hello i am a historian and i am researching about stone henge and would like to add some things to it so i wanted to ask if i can edit this source to add some things Abitd (talk) 20:51, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
Stonehenge has been vandalised many times in the past, generally considerably more significantly eg https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1961/mar/14/stonehenge-defacement and https://www.upi.com/Archives/1990/03/21/Stonehenge-scarred-by-graffiti/1863637995600/ (Note second source's mention that on average graffiti artists vandalise these stones about once a decade)
Surely either none of these incidents are noteworthy or they all are? It seems strange to have a whole section and attached separate article for a very minor act of vandalism of no historic significance that I can see 2001:4646:4DE6:0:45A9:D292:3490:391A (talk) 15:02, 20 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change "marked three standing stones" to "vandalized three standing stones" Marcell.Lovas93 (talk) 20:50, 20 June 2024 (UTC)Reply