User talk:Hoopes/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 → Archive 5

Mayanism

Hi there Hoopes- would just like to compliment you on your impressive expansion of the a/n article. I think you've struck just about the right balance on a topic that is notoriously infused with much vagueness and speculative claims. You've also done very well to neutrally describe and distinguish between the contemporary esoteric interpretations, and the more authentic historically-based ones they are often mistaken for. Nice work! Cheers, --cjllw ʘ TALK 07:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Votan

Hi there Hoopes. If you want to change Votan from redirecting to Woden and beginning an article there instead (I agree it would make an interesting subject), here's how to do it:

  1. just enter "Votan" in the search box and hit "go", or alternatively just click on the link to Votan above
  2. You will be redirected to the Woden article. However, at the top left of the page you should see some small text saying "(redirected from Votan)". Clicking on the link to Votan there will open up the Votan page without forcing the redirect. It will look something like this: #REDIRECT [[Woden]].
    1. This external link will also have the same effect.
  3. Then just click the 'edit this page' tab, and you can start the new article by replacing the '#redirect' instruction with your new text.

To handle other possible meanings / associations of "Votan", we can just put up some variety of disambiguating hatnote on it to provide pointers to other potential targets. Would be happy to help setting that up once you've made a start on the new article.

Hope that helps, and regards, --cjllw ʘ TALK 07:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


Hi Hoopes, no worries. And many thanks for that extremely interesting expansion on Votan- good work! Just one or two minor stylistic conventions there that I'll update. One thing that would be great to add in when you get a chance is a couple of inline cites against the key assertions, to annotate where that particular info comes from. This is accomplished by enclosing the annotation between <ref> and </ref> tags, immediately after the sentence. You can use a Harvard-esque abbr., for example:
Some statement that would benefit from an inline cite specifying the source of the information.<ref>Smith and Jones (1992, pp.123-125).</ref>
The cited work (here Smith and Jones) would be expanded in full bibliographical style under the 'references' section. I'll have a go at adding in some of these, but may need your help for page no's etc as I don't have those works to hand myself.
Otherwise I think this serves its purpose admirably. It will be interesting to see if anything from actual Maya legendary accounts turns up, as opposed to the subsequent embellishments and projections by Europeans from Clavijero onwards. Regards,--cjllw ʘ TALK 05:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
ps. I did some quick scouting around for other related context mentions of votan, no doubt you've come across these. I think it'd be good to work them into the article for a fuller picture, I listed them on the article's talk page here. Saludos, --cjllw ʘ TALK 08:02, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

DYK!

Updated DYK query On 4 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Votan, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Congrats! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia Assignments for "The Ancient Maya" at KU (Fall 2008)

To my students: Please use this space for asking any questions you might have about the assignment. I'll answer if I can, but there may also be some answers from others. Please remember to sign your posts! Hoopes (talk) 01:17, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Ancient Maya class contribs suggestion

Hi there Hoopes. Saw your proposal at the WP:MESO strategy talkpg, re your class coordinating some (much-needed) imput & improvement on Maya articles. I think that is a fantastic idea, and any input from that quarter would be most welcome. Feel sure that the other (alas few in number) currently active wp:meso folks would be only too happy to help out and support if and where needed.

I crossposted your proposal outline to the main WT:MESO discussion board (here), as that is probably the most visible place. May I suggest that further notices and chat take place in that thread. Completely up to you, but you might like to set up some separate project and discussion page to aid coordination; whatever suits.

You might also like to look over WP:SUP, some optional guidelines and suggestions for coordinating school & uni class inputs and contributions. May or may not contain some useful info. I know that User:Thelmadatter, a TEFL instructor at ITESM has been doing quite a few class contribs for Mexico-related articles for a while know, which have been working pretty well. Cheers, --cjllw ʘ TALK 04:42, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi John. Good idea, but you might want to read [1] so you don't run into any of the problems that professor did. Doug Weller (talk) 08:08, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, guys! I've actually used this kind of assignment several times already (for courses on Mesoamerica, the Central Andes, and the history of anthropology), but decided to be more "transparent" in WP:MESO this time so that my students could see how more of the behind-the-scenes stuff works, especially in the context of WP:MESO. I am making it clear to students that this is NOT a context in which I want them to post termpaper drafts, but instead to create content appropriate for this medium. We'll see how it goes! (BTW, I really wish I could find more time for my own contributions...) Hoopes (talk)
No probs, and best wishes for the exercise. If you or any of your students run into issues or misunderstandings (for eg, to another wiki editor unaware of their origins, student contribs like these sometimes look suspicious, potential copyvios & the like) just give any of us a shout & we'll help to sort it out. Regards, --cjllw ʘ TALK 09:10, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Maya personage names

Hello All: Two questions here. First, I am working on an entry on the topic of Ruling Queens and I have come across some different name spellings in two very recent publications for one of the Queens of Yaxchilan--Lady K'abal Xook. For my entry, which will be a stand alone page, I am inclined to use that of Martin and Grube 2008 in their Chronicle of Maya Queens and Kings, however Josserand's publication of 2007 (The Missing Heir at Yaxchilan: Literary Analysis of a Maya Historical Puzzle, In Latin American Antiquity vol 18(3) p 295-312) has the name as Lady Xok. Additionally, the existing Wikipedia page on this queen has it written as Lady Xoc. So what to do? Second question/note is with regard to the existing Lady Xoc page, it is in some need of updating, clarifying and correcting of the existing text, which I can do as I have time but I wanted to check first before re-writing parts. Thanks Archaeochica (talk) 05:36, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Archaeochica, apologies for delay in commenting on your questions.
Re the naming conventions and orthography for ancient Maya personages- at WP:MESO we had begun to work out some consistent naming guidelines, but so far have only developed a couple of guiding principles: see the WP:MESO guidelines page. The rule of thumb for wikipedia naming conventions as a whole can be paraphrased as "use the most common name form (if there is one) for an entity, as it appears in english-language sources" — refer to WP:NC. However, for most things we write about on Mesoamerican topics they are usually not widely enough known beyond the fields of Mesoamericanist study to have acquired some definitive 'common-use' form, so we take a more specific approach. Or more to the point, we might interpret "most common name" as the most common name appearing in contemporary scholarly sources, and not "common" in the sense that, say, some generic travel guide would use.
For Maya personal and deity names or titles, our guideline would be to firstly use the actual Maya name (if that is known through some generally accepted modern decipherment), instead of any 'pre-decipherment' nickname or guess that may have been used in the past—even if that nickname or approximation may still be popularly known (Of course, as an encyclopaedia the relevant article should mention and document all of the main alternative names by which the figure has been referred to in literature past). Thus, we'd have Siyaj K'ak' and not "Smoking Frog", for eg. (the latter redirects to the former). However, if the figure's name is not yet deciphered or uncertain, then we'd refer to them by some established nickname or approximation, like "Casper" or "Sky Witness". Note, we still have articles like Lady Xoc and Pacal the Great which do not yet conform to these guidelines, although at some stage would prefer that they do. Pakal's article really should be at K'inich Janaab' Pakal, have been meaning to move it there for a while now only hadn't worked out disambiguating with the other couple of Janaab' Pakals.
As far as which version of orthography to spell Maya names goes, that's not so well defined. For consistency between articles, we've proposed a general adherence to ALMG orthography of Mayan languages, as a preferred update over the historical 16thC and later Spanish orthographies (eg ajaw, not ahau, or ahaw; pakal not pacal; kawak not cauac). Within this though there are still some spelling choices which seem to be six of one and half-a-dozen of the other, eg b'alam vs b'ahlam, and others where proposed decipherments differ, eg yopaat vs yoaat. This is as close to a consistent standard that we can suggest, in the absence of an identified overarching resource that covers/applies a consistent orthography for every Maya name, that we cld refer to.
In the particular case of Lady Xoc (Xok), we'd therefore lean towards K'abal Xook (or more strictly following ALMG, K'ab'al Xook ), while at the same time mentioning all the other variants and previous handles. IMO I'm not entirely convinced about having "Lady" (or ix) as part of her name/article title, but recognise that it's often appended.
Re the 2nd part of your question: by all means! If you have the time to spare then please do have a go at rewriting that article. We can always tidy up names & spelling &c. after the fact, but having the info there expanded in the first place would be excellent.
Hope this helps, regards --cjllw ʘ TALK 06:22, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

One of yours?

Hi Hoopes. Is this editor Chrisbfromeg (talk · contribs) one of your KU students? If so, seems some new article watchers got a little suspicious at seeing the text of their Maya priesthood article appearing out-of-the-blue, and it's ended up nominated for deletion or merging. I'll contest the deletion/merge proposal anyway since there's valid info there, but wanted to check if part of the overall assignment. --cjllw ʘ TALK 05:23, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the author of this entry is one of my students. I'm not sure of the reasons given for deletion, although merging with an existing article may be a better strategy. What do you think? Hoopes (talk) 20:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
OK, thx for the clarification. The deletion proposal didn't go though. I tend to agree with the comments you made at talk:Maya priesthood that there'd be a distinction to be drawn between "Shamanism" and the topic of this new article (I think "Maya priesthood" needs a better name, but can't think of one ATM. Maybe later). Re incorporating the priesthood article into (say) the Maya religion article- some merit in that, but would equally be inclined to keep them as separate articles. Both need work and while one can cross-ref the other as subjects they can stand independently. Until recently we used to have a Maya shamanism article as well, tho' I've just noticed someone has just redirected this to the Maya religion article without any content transfer (the content was in bad shape, but still could've been improved; the old version is here.) Maybe the shamanism one could be brought back (in an improved form), so that we cld have the 'priesthood' (or whatever better title) and 'shamanism' articles to make that distinction. --cjllw ʘ TALK 06:16, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. One of the problems with the priest vs. shaman (and priesthood vs. shamanism) issue is that it is difficult to avoid venturing into the realm of new scholarship. Despite a lot of important discussion by Cecelia Klein, Alice Beck Kehoe, Barbara Tedlock, and others, there remains no consensus on whether "shaman" or "priest" is a better term. The best work I've seen on this is by Max Weber in Sociology of Religion (book), with additional theoretical work more recently by Augusto Oyuela-Caycedo. I think the best strategy is to pick the best title (perhaps "Maya shamanism") and do a redirect from "Maya priesthood". Hoopes (talk) 20:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Midwifery in Maya society

Hi, I was wondering if you realized that Midwifery in Maya society was already a "live" article? I was trying to work on it myself, but maybe you could look it over since you seem to be much more familiar with the subject material than I am. --Ships at a Distance (talk) 22:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Blossom Goodchild

A tag has been placed on Blossom Goodchild requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. X MarX the Spot (talk) 05:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Blossom Goodchild

Re your message: It was an oversight on my part for not restoring the Talk page. It's a long story, but the article was deleted for a moment and I restored it. While I was fixing the mess that I made, I had forgotten that I had deleted the Talk page. It's back now. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:41, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

(Aug. 2009) ANTH 500 Week 5 Reading

I am unable to find Hoopes 2004 as listed for Week 5 on the Semester Schedule page of Blackboard/Courseware. I do not see it under the Online Articles, Downloadable Files from JSTOR, or anywhere else. Aaropender (talk) 16:33, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll check the listing. However, for future reference, please restrict questions on this page to the Wikipedia assignment only. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.124.62.206 (talk) 15:46, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

ANTH 500 FA 2009

Were the papers presented at the Annual Meeting[s] of the Society for American Archaeology published in any form? I have seen references to them that are enticing and I would like to get my hands on about three or four of these papers presented in various years around the late 70s, but I can not find either hard or electronic copies of them: only citations. Does anybody have either access to them or a definitive answer regarding their being published? Aaropender (talk) 19:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Blossom Goodchild

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Blossom Goodchild. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blossom Goodchild (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:11, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blossom Goodchild (2nd nomination), of course. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:12, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I really hope you haven't quit

You made some good additions, but more importantly I need your help to finish reffing them. I was hoping you could add page numbers to some of the book refs you cited. Also, the line refuting the Aztec Hunab Ku still needs citing and one of the cites you added (South2009) doesn't have a corresponding reference. Sorry to bother you but this article is moving closer to the higher levels and really needs a push to get to the top. Serendipodous 18:51, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay. I went back and fixed what you wanted fixed. I'll do more as I find the time. Hoopes (talk) 03:40, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Q. re plagiarism from Wikipedia

Hi Hoopes, apologies for the long delay in replying to your questions, I've been away/offline these past couple of weeks.

While wikipedia allows and even encourages the reuse of its material (see WP:REUSE), that does not mean wikipedia content can be regurgitated verbatim without attribution or restriction. The situation you describe sounds like it would violate wikipedia's Terms of Use agreement, and plagiarism to boot. Even if the content was in the Public Domain (which it isn't), they still should not be just reproducing it without attribution of the source it came from.

As I understand it, any reuse, republication, derivative work or modification of the wiki-original content needs to comply with the terms of the license the content is released under, which these days is generally the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-SA) license (content created before 15 Jun 2009 can still also be covered by the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) as well; not 100% sure how the dual-licensing (CC-BY-SA & GFDL) we've had since June 2009 works, but the article text content comes under at least one of these). CC-BY-SA (and/or GFDL) are legally binding documents, so non-compliance with the license's terms wld be 'illegal' in that sense, I s'pose. Also, the contributors of original wikipedia content still retain their actual copyright individually over their own material (it's only that the material is made available under the free CC-BY-SA license). Therefore, any reproduction of that material that fails to comply with the terms of the license the copyright holder released it under, would constitute a violation of the individual contributor(s)' copyright.

Among other things, CC-BY-SA (&/or GFDL) licensing conditions require attribution of the source to be made clearly, and the (usually multiple) authorship identified either by a list or at the least a link to the orig wikipedia content & its history. Also, and importantly, the reproduced, modified or deriviative work must itself be licensed under the same terms (copyleft), ie can't be placed under a more restrictive licensing condition (like full & exclusive copyright). And the CC-BY-SA (or GFDL) license terms & conditions need also to be reproduced along with the work. At least, that's my understanding; from what you describe doesn't seem that any of that has been complied with. License compliance should also apply to reproduced segments/passages from our articles, not just if the whole thing is reproduced.

Unfortunately wikipedia/the WMF as a whole is not really geared up to pursue licensing infringements in a coordinated way, AFAIK. It is usually up to individual contributors to follow up on possible breaches of the license conditions. I suppose in a way it makes for a stronger case if the individual copyright holder (ie individual who wrote the orig text) pursues the matter. There are a couple of places where license compliance issues are listed and followups tracked, such as WP:GFDL Compliance and now WP:CC-BY-SA Compliance. Content reusers who might be in breach get listed at Mirrors and Forks (anyone can do this), and a record of followup attempts can be made; the non compliance followup process is described there. Individuals, not wikipedia as an entity, generally do the followups. There are a couple of form letters that can be used. The content reuser also shld be added to the CCBYSA or GFDL (as appte) compliance list.

However, the above is pretty much geared towards material reproduced on the internet, not in printed books. But in theory it should be much the same process, and I don't see why a printed book/publisher could not be listed here and dealt with in this way too. It's the only central place I know of where such reuse licensing issues are documented. The form letters wld have to be modified to make sense in being about a printed book, but they are well worth a read in any case.

In practical terms for the case you describe, I'd reckon a letter to the publisher or other followup contact with them would be in order. You'd think that at least the publisher wld want to be alerted that the work they'd paid some author for contains material that someone else (original wiki contributor/s) has the copyright on and its being reused contrary to its licensing conditions. Such an approach would be strengthened if it came from the contributor(s) of the text, but it doesn't have to. In order to find out which contributor(s) originally added some piece of text, there's a tool called WikiBlame that can be used. It can help identify the exact edit in which a piece of text was first added (and also help to demonstrate that some wiki passage was put together over time and over multiple edits, ie that it wasn't itself just copied wholesale from somewhere else).

So I guess first step is demonstrating that the text originated in wikipedia, and who the orig content contributors were. What are some of the suspect passages, and from which article(s) do you think they come from? I'd be interested in any followups, and wld be glad to help (when back online with a little more availability than I have right now) if I can. Cheers, --cjllw ʘ TALK 05:17, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

2012 phenomenon

There is a quote in the 2012 phenomenon article (McKenna originally considered it an incidental observation that his and José Argüelles dates matched, a sign of the end date "being programmed into our unconscious") that has never been sourced, and I'm not sure but I think you added it. If you could provide a citation for that quote I would much appreciate it. Thanks. Serendipodous 12:11, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Assignments for "Ancient Central America" at KU (Fall 2009)

To my students: Please use this space for asking any questions you might have about the assignment. I'll answer if I can, but there may also be some answers from others. Please remember to sign your posts! Hoopes (talk) 19:09, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Hoopes. Good and welcome news that you're going through this exercise once more, & sure it'll be as productive and beneficial an experience as it was last time. We at WikiProject Mesoamerica will do our best to help out and advise where we can, without intruding on their composition before it gets marked & published to mainspace. Kindly inform your students they'd be welcome to contact any of us directly for wiki-editing how-to's, or leave a msg at the Mesoamerica project's discussion board WT:MESO. Once you have all of their usernames maybe you could list them at WT:MESO so we know who to look out for.
One suggestion for this time around: instead of developing their article on their main userpage or user talkpage, it would prob be better if the students set up a dedicated user subpage for it. Easiest way would be for them to save a link on their main userpage, consisting of a backslash followed by the proposed article title (or "Draft" or any text, really), like this: [[/Article title]]. Then they just click on that link to create the new subpage, which will be created at User:Student username/Article title. They then just add some text, save it, and away they go. Once they're all set up you could just save a list of these links somewhere so you can flick between them. To give them in-progress feedback, use their user talkpage (or even the draft's talkpage, as long as they know to look for the comments there). For convenience, they could transclude their working draft subpage onto their main userpage so it's visible from there, by adding {{User:Student username/Article title}} to the main userpage somewhere.
I've probably made that sound more complicated than it is, would be glad to help out any who might be confused by the explanation.
One other thing I would suggest is for the students to start out with using the particular referencing system wikipedia calls WP:CITESHORT, it's what we mostly use for meso articles and should also be quite familiar to the students. They build a separate bibliography of sources towards the end of the article (in a separate section called either "References" or "Bibliography". Within the body of the text itself, they can then cite individual statements with shortened cites that correspond to some entry in the bibliography. This is easily done by adding cites in the form of <ref>Smith 2008, p.123</ref> after the statement to be cited.
ps. Agree it would be great if some of those covered Isthmo-Colombian/Intermediate/Lower CA region, which is woefully under-represented here on en.wiki. Fantastic, in fact, have long wanted to expand stuff in that area. Look forward to it, cheers! (reply also added to ur talkpg). --cjllw ʘ TALK 01:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Examples of Model Entries

None of these are perfect, but nonetheless good models for what I'd like to see.

Possible Entries

The following is a partial wish list of just some of the entries that I would like to see created (in red) and/or improved (in blue). Please feel free to add additional entries that you would like to see! (I'll be adding more, too, as I find time.) If you decide to take one of these, please sign after it (with four tildes) so other students will know it's already taken.

Archaeological and Historical Sites

Note that there will need to be disambiguations for some of these entries!

Archaeological Regions and Cultures

Archaeologists and Others

General Topics

Helpful Online Resources

One of the most useful published sources for research on your Wikpedia entries will be The Archaeology of Lower Central America[2], edited by Frederick W. Lange and Doris Z. Stone (1984). It is available in an electronic version for KU faculty, staff, and students by clicking on the superscript link (which may require login). If you have trouble getting to the publication via the link here, you can access it through the KU online catalog.

KU Student Authors

Please sign this list (with four tildes) once you've created your Wikipedia user account. You should also add a short statement about what entry you'll be creating or working on.

This is my username: Jess.maureen (talk) 19:54, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

This is my username: Stamford Raffles (talk) 19:55, 1 September 2009 (UTC) I am working on: Arenal Prehistory Project

Anne Egitto Archaeochica (talk) 19:56, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

This is my username. Robinlb (talk) 19:57, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Michael Davis Mhughdavis (talk) 19:58, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Welcome messages added for the three that didn't have one. Dougweller (talk) 20:34, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Maggie Cargill Mcargill05 (talk) 21:28, 1 September 2009 (UTC) I would like to work on something about ancient central american religious tradition, something that involves animal iconography and therianthropy. If not, I'd like to work on something related to the earliest peoples and their way life. Maybe the emergence and initial uses of pottery?

This is my username: Alexnort (talk) 22:18, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Blair Benson Roxrule (talk) 02:07, 2 September 2009 (UTC) I'm working on Pre-Columbian burial mounds of Costa Rica

Adam Benfer Adambenfer (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:12, 2 September 2009 (UTC). I'm writing about Las Mercedes.

Brandy Entsminger: Bentsminger (talk) 18:35, 2 September 2009 (UTC): Fray Adrian de Santo Tomas

Jessica Burger Jessburgs (talk) 15:18, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Greg Kauffman Gregk78 (talk) 14:00, 3 September 2009 (UTC) I'm working on the Sitio Conte site.

Brendon Asher Brendon5 (talk) 14:35, 3 September 2009 (UTC) I would like to research the Turrialba Clovis site (Guardiria) in eastern Costa Rica

Aaron Pendergrass. I'm considering writing about megafauna or another 'paleo' topic like subsistence strategies. I'm most interested in older topics - such as the first peoples known to inhabit/pass through this area. Please inform me whether this is inappropriate or of any good sources. Thank you. Aaropender (talk) 16:00, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Michael Grotz: I would like to work on topics related to Costa Rican archeology. I'm interesting in gaining a sense of the unique mind behind the material culture of the Americas. I have a sense of what's going on in the mind of the East and the West, but I'd like to know what's going on/was going on in the South, as a distinctive cultural and ideological region. M.Grotz (talk) 16:31, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Miles Golson: Milesag (talk) 18:07, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Michelle Phillips: Mishellaneous (talk) 18:19, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Mishellaneous I plan on updating the information on the Lenca of Honduras and El Salvador.

Robert Shin: Rpshin (talk) 20:48, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Samantha Bradbeer: Sbradbeer (talk)16: 16, 3 September 2009 (UTC) Samuel Kirkland Lothrop

Piper Wolfe: Pjwolfe (talk) 15:37, 5 September 2009 (UTC) - Olga F. Linares

Robin L. Bang. As noted above, I would like to work on Greater Nicoya. Robinlb (talk) 15:53, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

David Gonzalez Davidggonz (talk) 04:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Patrick Green patmgreen Writing a general Paleoindian article, my apologies for not signing in on this page

Kt West Ktwest (talk) 21:05, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Brigid Dunn Brigidsu (talk) 17:11, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Nathan hutchcraft (talk) 23:26, 24 October 2010 (UTC) I am going to be working on a page for author Patrick Geryl

Wikipedia Adminstrator Input

Dougweller (talk) is a Wikipedia administrator with a special interest in archaeology and pseudoarchaeology. As noted above, he's posted some helpful comments in the section of his talk page titled Student Editors at KU. Please let me know if other Wikipedia administrators are giving you feedback on your entries so that I can share that feedback with others. Hoopes (talk) 17:42, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

One of yours, I think

I've just reverted 2 edits, these [3] which rejects the reasons given originally and suggests some sort of bias as a reason instead. I hadn't realised it might be one of your students until I checked their talk page. Dougweller (talk) 20:13, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I put some comments about this on the student's talk page. Let me know if you think I explained the issue correctly. Hoopes (talk) 21:30, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Hoopes. You have new messages at Dougweller's talk page.
Message added 05:59, 27 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wikipedia Assignments for "Archaeological Myths & Realities" at KU (Fall 2010)

To my students: Please use this space for asking any questions you might have about the assignment. I'll answer if I can, but there may also be some answers from others. Please remember to sign your posts! Hoopes (talk) 21:15, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

To develop your article for this assignment, please set up a dedicated user subpage for it and save the link on your main userpage. You would do this by creating a name consisting of a backslash followed by the proposed article title (or "Draft" or any text). It should be coded like this: [[/Article title]]. Click on that link to create the new subpage, which will be created at User:Student username/Article title. You can then add some text, save it, and then continue.

For convenience, you can transclude your working draft subpage onto your main userpage so it's visible from there by adding {{User:Student username/Article title}} to the main userpage somewhere.

Start out with using the particular referencing system wikipedia calls WP:CITESHORT. You can then build a separate bibliography of sources towards the end of the article (in a separate section called either "References" or "Bibliography". Within the body of the text itself, you can then cite individual statements with shortened cites that correspond to some entry in the bibliography. This is easily done by adding cites in the form of <ref>Smith 2008, p.123</ref> after the statement to be cited.

Basic Wikipedia Principles

Neutral point of view, verifiability, and no original research are Wikipedia's three core content policies. Together, these determine what type and quality of material will be acceptable in Wikipedia articles. Be sure to familiarize yourself with all three. The principles upon which these policies are based cannot be superseded by other policies or guidelines, or by editors' consensus. If you violate these policies, your article may be subject to sharp criticism, correction, and even deletion! It is strongly recommended that you review the Wikipedia Neutral Point of View Tutorial to understand what is meant by a neutral point of view in Wikipedia articles.

Examples of Model Entries

None of these are perfect, but nonetheless good models for what I'd like to see. Of course, there are lots of other examples listed on the course website. The objective is to provide adequate coverage for anyone searching on topics related to pseudoarchaeology.

For some examples of articles to which I have contributed major revisions, see:


Ktwest (talk) 02:02, 2 November 2010 (UTC) I was wondering if I could switch my topic, it falls under the same category, but I'd just like to focus on diseases that were caused by the transition to farming. paleopathology

Skype

Hey, Hoopes. Just a heads up about this sort off thing [4]. The highlighting can be turned of by clicking the Skype icon that, on my screen,is extreme top right with a green/white phone and 123 on it. Then just untick 'Turn number highlighting on'. Rgds, Mannafredo (talk) 14:06, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Tsarion (2nd nomination)

I see one of your students is working on an article on this person, he needs to read the deletion discussion before recreating the article. Ah, looking again, he can't create it, it's protected. Interesting. I have to think about that, maybe go to WP:DRV but he'll have to show evidence that he's met the earlier objections. Dougweller (talk) 09:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Could you direct him to the deletion discussion? He's aware of the issue and I've asked him to consider and address it. Hoopes (talk) 23:07, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
I did that at the same time I posted the above to you. Dougweller (talk) 06:36, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

User:Mwescoe/D.H. Childress

We already have David Childress. Dougweller (talk) 18:36, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

mwescoe (talk)I was thinking of adding my DH Childress page to the existing David Childress page. specifically about his Olmec book. does that seem more appropriate? —Preceding undated comment added 20:01, 4 November 2010 (UTC).

Yes, I know. What this author wants to do is to prepare an additional section based on Childress' latest book about the Olmec. It wouldn't be a new entry but modification of an existing one. Hoopes (talk) 23:04, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Ok. Sooner or later it may be removed as promotional/insignificant/not discussed elsewhere enough, but for the moment that makes sense. Dougweller (talk) 06:37, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hoopes/Archive_1&oldid=1138988421"