Talk:Artifact

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Artifact article.
Article policies
WikiProject Disambiguation This page is part of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Contents

[edit] Question

Question to anyone who reads this: do you think we should split the archaeological and digital definitions of "artifact"? I have no problem wih them being on the same page, but as a newbie, I don't know the rules for this. Discuss!

It depends how much thre is to say on each. See wikipedia:Disambiguation. I would say the archaeological is by far the dominant, so that would stay here with a note & a link to Artifact (digital). -- Tarquin

Sounds good. Would this be a straightforward "see Artifact, digital" entry, or is there a special Wikipedia way of doing it? -- Storm

Are there just two meanings? See Newton for an example. -- Tarquin


[edit] suggested disambiguation titles

I think it should probably stay here until such time as there's enough for it to justify its own article; I think it's likely an article of its own would remain a tiny stub. - Khendon 17:56 Oct 28, 2002 (UTC)

Agreed. -- Storm

We could reconcile the two by saying something along the lines of "human or other (perceived) intelligent activity".

That would allow us to cut the following, which appears a bit garrulous to me (reminds me of Eisenhower's definition of an intellectual):

In a broader sense, it may be defined as anything created by any intelligent being, but at the moment our knowledge of intelligent beings consists of one example -- humanity. (Some ethologists, scientists who study animal behavior, may not agree with this assertion; nor would many UFO enthusiasts).</>

Sebastian 01:26 Jan 23, 2003 (UTC)

---

[edit] Photographic Meaning of Artifact

Outside of digital imaging, in photography an artifact is something present in a photograph that is a product of the processing method and was not part of the original thing(s) that the photograph is supposed to faithfully reproduce. This is, in fact, the source of the use of the word "artifact" in digital imageing. The term was first used many in photochemical photography nearly a century before computers were even invented. How should the page be modifed to reflect this? --Prophet121 01:14, 19 May 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Julian Huxley

I removed the bare statement that the word "artifact" was coined by Julian Huxley. The OED lists a number of usages long before Huxley was born, the earliest being:

1821 COLERIDGE in Blackw. Mag. X. 256 The conception of all these, as realized in one and the same artéfact, may be fairly entitled, the Ideal of an Ink-stand. 
1834 COLERIDGE Lit. Rem. III. 347 A lump of sugar of lead lies among other artefacts on the shelf of a collector.

If he began using the term in a specific way, then perhaps we can discuss that somewhere, or in one of the relevant linked disambiguated meanings. Nandesuka 04:16, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] expand

This lists a bunch of fields that use the word, but not how they use the word. So I marked it expand. RJFJR 16:24, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cleaning up the page

I removed the two redlinks (to Artifact (philosophy) and artifact (information theory)) when cleaning up the page, since they were at least partially covered by the other links to sites that actually exist. Please comment if you disagree. Norwaystudent 18:02, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edits made Mar 14 2008

Marchije (talk) 01:08, 15 March 2008 (UTC)