Talk:Kukulkan: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Quetzalcoatl/kukulkan: new section |
|||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
:Well, there is a separate [[Feathered Serpent (deity)]] article; this is an article about Kukulkan, however he/it may have been represented. All the images are relevant to the deity, even the Vision Serpent, from which it is argued that Kukulkan developed. Best regards, [[User:Simon Burchell|Simon Burchell]] ([[User talk:Simon Burchell|talk]]) 19:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC) |
:Well, there is a separate [[Feathered Serpent (deity)]] article; this is an article about Kukulkan, however he/it may have been represented. All the images are relevant to the deity, even the Vision Serpent, from which it is argued that Kukulkan developed. Best regards, [[User:Simon Burchell|Simon Burchell]] ([[User talk:Simon Burchell|talk]]) 19:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC) |
||
== Quetzalcoatl/kukulkan == |
|||
There is too much disscusion over Kukulkan being of white decent not to include it in the artice |
|||
Revision as of 20:57, 17 March 2010
 | Mesoamerica C‑class (inactive) | ||||||
| |||||||
 | Mexico C‑class | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Mythology C‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | A fact from Kukulkan appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 20 March 2009 (check views). A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2009/March. |  |
Watkins and Wilson are not reliable sources
From Atlantis to the Sphinx is considered a fringe work and should not be used to reference this article. Watkins' work, a travelogue about hiking thru Norway, is similarly unsuitable to reference a work on a Mayan deity. Rather we should be using works by academics who have studied Mayan deities. Sorry, and thanks, Madman (talk) 12:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- Reverting the entire page because you disagree with a reference is not an improvement. I'll do your job for you and revert to my previous edits minus the content you find objectionable. Ryan (talk) 13:18, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- Most of those earlier additions that were reverted were inaccurate in any event. Such as, confusing the Maya for the Aztec in the apocryphal myth of Cortes-as-returned-kukulkan/quetzalcoatl. The pop-culture ref could be lost without any detriment to the article, tho I realise it's a losing battle at times keeping too-trivial mentions out of articles like these.
- As it stands this article mostly repeats modern generic (mis)conceptions, & is in need of an overhaul. Will look to at least add in some reliable refs, maybe also change the focus of the article to concentrate on postclassic/colonial-era Yucatec uses & mentions, since as a pan-Maya concept it would be largely redundant with other articles. --cjllw ʘ TALK 01:27, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Illustrations: Serpents or Feathered Serpents?
Most of the pictures do not depict feathered serpents!77.162.130.139 (talk) 19:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- Well, there is a separate Feathered Serpent (deity) article; this is an article about Kukulkan, however he/it may have been represented. All the images are relevant to the deity, even the Vision Serpent, from which it is argued that Kukulkan developed. Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 19:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Quetzalcoatl/kukulkan
There is too much disscusion over Kukulkan being of white decent not to include it in the artice