<i>They have said it ad nauseam - ...</i>

That is the biggest danger point of all. It makes people say things like "What's all the fuss about then?"

<i> ... the campaign started ensuring terms like archaeological landscape were always used but evidently it needs emphasising even more.</i>

I haven't seen a great deal of the campaign material, so couldn't say. Perhaps it does.

<i>Complex is good. I think George uses it sometimes but maybe it should be used constantly so that it rolls off the tongue of friend and foe.</i>

It's a great word and is very powerful. The problem with using 'landscape' is that it does allow (as pointed out above) for Tarmac to say we'll replant etc and the landscape will be the same. 'Archaeological Landscape' means little to very many people. It's like asking people to "Save the wedge-shaped gallery grave" when what you should be doing is asking them to "Save the dolmen". Using "The Thornborough Complex" at least makes it clear that it isn't simple :-) and that it's not just the henges that are of concern.

<i>Another point worth pursuing is that comparisons with other important "complexes" hasn't been pushed hard enough maybe.</i>

Again, not having seen the bulk of the material I couldn't say, but comparison is hugely important here. Whether you like it or not "The Stonehenge of the North" is a must-have tag.

<i>The damnable thing is that the Stonehenge and Avebury complexes have lots of apparently relatively blank areas, yet regarding them as not part of the whole is inconceivable. Equally damnable is that blankness tends to be a function of not having been fully investigated. When they are, stuff is discovered.</i>

This needs expanding on with examples, but it's difficult.