Talk:John Pearson Gillam

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Thanks for another biography in this field. Whatever method you're using to generate reference seems be getting page number ranges consistently wrong. Again, I think that the orinal publication date is better for articles that are re-printed, or, rather, distributed electronically for the first time.

Klbrain (talk) 18:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is the archaeological data service archaeologydataservice.ac.uk - when I insert a reference using a DOI it returns the date when an item was entered there not the date of the original item. TheLostArchaeologists (talk) 18:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]