|
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. |
|
 FA |
This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| Low |
This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
|
|
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. |
|
| FA |
This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale. |
| Mid |
This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
The following editors are available to help with questions about verification and sources in relation to this article:
This in no way implies page ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute. |
[edit] Tak'alik A´baj text in case anything should be incorporated here
- Below text was at Tak'alik A´baj by User:Authenticmaya. Tak'alik A´baj was redirected to this article.
Tak’alik A’baj is located in the Guatemalan Pacific Low Lands, far away from Petén at the North, making it the biggest Mayan city in the Pacific Ocean coastal area in Mesoamérica, the city is also interesting due to its long occupation periods (800 BC to 900 AD), it is the only site in Mesoamerica with Olmec influences in the early years and Mayan influences afterward, and was a important commerce centre mainly with Kaminal Juyú and Chocol in what is now Guatemala City, and with Chocolá, to the east
The site is located in El Asintal, Retalhuleu some 118.06 milles (190 km) from Guatemala City in a paved road about 3 hrs, driving, during witch you will enjoy the major Volcanoes of Guatemala.
It has 82 monumental structures, including an astronomical observatory, temples, terraces, etc. and 282 monuments known to date, including impressive stelas and altars. The materials used are granite stones much different from the lime stone used in the Petén cities. Source UVG, Dr Marion Popenoe de Hatch
[edit] Long Count dates on stelae?
Would someone be so kind as to translate the Long Count dates shown on the lower of the two stelae graphics? The stone in the upper image appears to be too worn to see the whole date, but there are two dates on the lower graphic that would be interesting to know more about. Cheers -- Erik Anderson, 207.118.47.246 (talk) 15:36, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
- See Mesoamerican_Long_Count_calendar#Origin_of_the_Long_Count_calendar for the translation/transliteration of the dates listed on Stela 5. That article explains how to read Long Count dates, etc. Hope this helps, Madman (talk) 16:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
- It turns out that the drawing was flipped (r to left). That may account for some of the problem. Madman (talk) 03:58, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Amazing job
My watchlist was showing you'd been working on this article, so I thought I'd stop by and see how things are coming along. I was amazed at the content you've added -- wow! Keep up the good work!! Madman (talk) 03:58, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks Madman - as with Quiriguá, I'm buried under mountains of information, so I think I can keep going for a while yet... Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 07:25, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
I fully agree with Madman: Fantastic work! Just out of curiosity: what criterion did you use to include certain terraces/structures/altars/monuments/stelae? Availability of sources or best preserved or something else? bamse (talk) 09:42, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks Bamse. Inclusion of terraces, monuments etc. was down to availability of sources. Any that are not included are not sufficiently described in the sources I have available. I would have liked to give a far more detailed description of the terraces of the Central Group, for example, but had very little info. Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 09:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Article length
After my massive expansion of this article, I'm toying with the idea of submitting it for FA at some future date (and certainly not immediately), however I'm concerned about the article possibly being too lengthy - does anyone have an opinion on this? It might be worthwhile spooling off the majority of munuments etc. into a separate List of monuments at Takalik Abaj (for example) with just the more notable monuments being left here. On the other hand I might just throw the whole article up for FA review and see if it gets spat back out again. Any views either way? Simon Burchell (talk) 12:33, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
- It's not too long for my tastes, but others less interested in the topic than I am may feel differently. Hard to predict what would be said in FAC, still a bit of a lottery. At >70kb it's getting up there, but there are some lengthier FAs around (Nahuatl is 98 kb for eg).
Agree that having a list of monuments article wld be the most sensible way to hive off some of the info. Maybe such a list can be started anyway, then if later during FA it becomes an issue a head-start has already been made (the list wld not necessarily be in same format/presentation/content as the info currently in the article). I would not want to lose all that info from the main article altogether, agree it needs to cover at least the major / more significant ones.--cjllw ʘ TALK 01:19, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
For the record, in case anyone comes along here in a year or two's time and wonders if this is a reduced article - the whole thing got through FA unscathed. Simon Burchell (talk) 11:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
