Talk:Piltdown Man
<templatestyles src="Module:Message box/tmbox.css"/><templatestyles src="Talk header/styles.css" />
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Piltdown Man Template:Pagetype. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Template:Find general sources |
| Archives: Template:Comma separated entries<templatestyles src="Template:Tooltip/styles.css" />Auto-archiving periodScript error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".: Template:Human readable duration File:Information icon4.svg |
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Script error: No such module "Check for deprecated parameters".
Script error: No such module "Message box". Script error: No such module "Banner shell".
Wiki Education assignment: FYSEM-UA 900 Busting 11 myths about the archaeology of human evolution
Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment
Motive
[1] There is no reason why this should not be in the article. Gould is a great source. --Hob Gadling (talk) 19:41, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Who dun it?
Greetings. This is in the lede - - -
"An extensive scientific review in 2016 established that amateur archaeologist Charles Dawson was responsible for the fraudulent evidence.[1]"
Yet, this is in "Identity of the forger" - - -
"The identity of the Piltdown forger remains unknown, but suspects have included Dawson, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Arthur Keith, Martin A. C. Hinton, Horace de Vere Cole and Arthur Conan Doyle.[16][17][18]"
Citations [1] and [18] seem quite definite about Dawson as does all the evidence against him (the other 38 known hoaxes he fabricated and the papers he plagiarized). It seems safe to commit to Dawson as the culprit in this article and just say that the others were suspected "at one time" or something similar.
Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 16:08, 6 June 2025 (UTC)