"From The Pit" Addendums and Feedback

[JackCrafty]

Whenever I get my issue of PA Magazine I always check my article closely to see if there are any typos or wording that doesn't make sense.  Of course, I proof read the article before I submit it but I don't always catch everything.  Especially when I revise something just before submitting it.

Anyway, I'm starting this thread, at the start of a new year, to share with you any corrections or revisions that I wish I had made before submitting the final draft of the article(s).  There are also very rare occasions that part(s) of the printed article didn't match my submission that I would like to correct.  Also, if you would like to ask specific questions or get clarifications, you can ask here and I will do my best to address any issues.

I am not allowed to post any part of the articles here, so you'll need to refer to the magazine to get the full effect.   

[JackCrafty]

OK, well, I'll start things off by posting here a part of an article that didn't get printed.  In the current issue (Volume 22, Issue 1), they left out a section called "Random Quotes".  I'm thinking of including this section in all future articles.  They included the references...  they just left out the quotes.  Here are the quotes:


“Most projectile points were discarded or lost during work and maintenance activities at camps and villages.”[1]

“Since in many, perhaps most, instances the function cannot with certainty be deduced from the remaining part [of a projectile point], the writer’s attempts at such identification, where hazarded, are equivocal.”[2]

“Debitage, arguably the most common artifact type found on archaeological sites worldwide, has recently become one of the most controversial and apparently least understood artifact types.”[3]

“Most artifact types were recognized and formally described before archaeologists knew enough about knapping to include information about the processes used to make the tools.”[4]