Talk:Lemuria

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lemuria article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Lemuria. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Lemuria at the Reference desk.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Geography Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography 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.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles 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.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

Merge from Lemuria in popular culture

LEMURIA IN POPULAR CULTURE HAS BEEN MERGED INTO LEMURIA.

Consensus indicated that Mu (mythical lost continent) is a different topic and should remain separate. Joyous! Noise! 04:47, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The Lemuria in popular culture has a prose section that can be merged to the 'in popular culture', but otherwise it doesn't meet WP:GNG/WP:IPC, as most of that article is a TVTrope WP:NLIST failing list of WP:TRIVIA in the style of 'all media that mentions Lemuria', which is simply not encyclopedic. A lot of similar content has been deleted at AfD, but I think given the prose section, we can rescue something by merging instead of deleting that subarticle. Thoughts? PS. I noticed this merge was proposed 7 years ago (Talk:Lemuria/Archive_1#Proposed_merge_with_Lemuria_in_popular_culture) and rejected back then, but today I'll repeat - if the merge won't happen this subarticle is likely to be deleted. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 18:36, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is essential to preserve the content of Lemuria in popular culture as Wikipedia is still the best and most reliable source for this information, much of which is difficult to find elsewhere. I think the best model is to follow that of Atlantis, a much better known "lost continent", for which there is not a separate "Atlantis in popular culture" article, though there is one on Atlantis in comics. The structure of the article on Lemuria should follow the general structure of the one on Atlantis, making it clear what information is history and science and what information is pseudohistory and pseudoscience. Hoopes (talk) 02:40, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Another merge to consider is with the article Mu (mythical lost continent). With the exception of Le Plongeon's 19th century references to Atlantis as the "Land of Mu" (where his mythical Queen Moo lived), Mu and Lemuria are essentially two different names for the same imaginary place. I don't think there is any meaningful justification for separating Mu from Lemuria. The articles Lemuria and Mu (mythical lost continent) should definitely be merged into a single article in order to avoid ongoing confusion. Hoopes (talk) 02:45, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to belabor this point, but it makes absolutely NO sense for Lemuria to have three separate articles, Lemuria, Lemuria in popular culture, and Mu (mythical lost continent) for one place when there is only one article for Atlantis (or two, if you include Atlantis in comics), which is a much more widely known and more heavily researched "lost continent". Hoopes (talk) 03:12, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd support the merge of popular culture and primary article. There is little reason to spread the content around when a single stronger article could be made that puts the content in better context for a reader.

No opinion on Mu because I simply don't know enough.Slywriter (talk) 04:03, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hoopes Support the merge of popular culture and primary article. I'm concerned that doing that and merging with Mu might make a large confusing article. We'd have to trim Mu a lot. Doug Weller talk 14:25, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your opinions! I don't know much about merging articles. Is there a way to do it that preserves the edit history and the Talk page discussions of each? I think Mu could continue as a separate article as long as it's made clearly in both articles how Lemuria and Mu are closely related and refer pretty much to the same thing. Hoopes (talk) 15:40, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hoopes see Wikipedia:Merging. Doug Weller talk 15:47, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the comments on the Mu article, it may benefit from being trimmed whether it's merged with Lemuria or not. Hoopes (talk) 15:41, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree with you, I think it is important to mention that Mu and Lemuria are the same imaginary place because the different names are important to recognize due to the fact that some articles refer to Lemuria as Mu. I also agree the popular culture article should be merged because the popular culture side of Lemuria is very fascinating and provides different theories. I think there is much that could be added to the popular culture part of Lemuria. (Claireblanck (talk) 17:54, 28 April 2022 (UTC))[reply]

Agree to merge Lemuria in popular culture here, but oppose merging Mu (mythical lost continent). Obviously, the latter has been mostly fantasized to lie in the Pacific ocean, so – even if not real – refers to a different concept. There is a shared strain that crackpots have linked certain Indian myths to imaginary lost land masses either in the Indian or the Pacific Ocean, but that's not sufficient to consider Lemuria (which started as a regular falsifiable scientific hypothesis) and "Mu" (which was rubbish from the very beginning) the same topic. –Austronesier (talk) 19:20, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. We can mention the confusion, but they start from different sources. Doug Weller talk 08:24, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge with a heavy dose of clean-up. Doesn't meet the WP:GNG and Wikipedia is WP:NOT a directory of appearances discovered by editors. Jontesta (talk) 00:43, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge with popular culture, oppose merge with Mu; they're entirely different myths. (Though it looks like Mu needs a cleanup anyway.) Antimoany (talk) 00:05, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merger complete.

Wiki Education assignment: CALIFORNIA DREAMING, THE GOLDEN STATE'S RHETORICAL APPEALS

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 April 2023 and 11 June 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Redbullrbbr (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Viva d34.

— Assignment last updated by Phrynefisher (talk) 13:41, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lemuria on Diego Garcia island passport stamp - edit removed

Why was my edit removed? I added that Lemuria is named in the motto of Diego Garcia island, and that the word appears in that territory's passport stamp. I provided a reliable citation from a trusted source (BBC News). Surely this is useful and interesting information about Lemuria? I can't think of any reason for this piece of factual information to have been deleted. I think it should be reinstated. Thanks for your consideration. (I will try to sign this post correctly. I am not experienced with Wikipedia.) 82.7.176.216 (talk) 13:05, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because its pointless trivia that teaches us zero about the topic. Slatersteven (talk) 13:08, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Pointless trivia"? I disagree. The reference to the subject of this article is directly relevant and interesting: it's an example of a real-world use of the name of this famous mythical place. 82.7.176.216 (talk) 19:23, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]