This is an archive of past discussions with User:Simon Burchell. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi, as you are a highly qualified editor and have rated "Ethereal being" article, I invite you to give your valuable opinion in the ongoing discussion to merge, delete or rewrite that article (which I oppose). I inform you that this article although rated “B” in all its categories, afterward the opening of this discussion, these grades were immediately decreased. Even if you don’t have interest on it, may I have your opinion, in particular on the latter comment? BluishPixie (talk) 01:42, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your thoughts - on the Troll Article.
I just wanted to drop in and say thanks for your awesome comments on the troll article, and the new proposed sections. I appreciate your helpful tips, and I hope you won't mind stopping in from time to time and joining in on the conversation. I didn't start the article, I actually came in on an RfC request, though I love the topic, and have been into mythology for sometime, so I plan to stick around and try to help the article become more comprehensive.
Anyways, I'll try not to chat up your page too much (I have a habit of doing that, lol). Thanks again, and hope to see ya round the wiki soon =) --Bema Self (talk) 12:54, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
File:ResplendentQuetzal.jpgFor your extraordinary work on the ancient history of Guatemala I hereby award you the wiki-order of the Quetzal. If the President of Guatemala was aware of the amazing job you are doing in making his country's history present on wikipedia I have no doubt he would award you the real one. I am very impressed and inspired by your energy and dedication. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw·01:25, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
No, I'm not sick to death at all! In fact I was rather impressed at such a comprehensive copyedit - I realise the article is long, and I appreciate the hard work you're doing. Many thanks, Simon Burchell (talk) 22:39, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
I know how it feels; every reviewer ought to have been through the mill a few times themselves. I still remember the feeling when SandyG promoted my article on a bog, maybe three years ago now? I'd worked bloody hard on that, and I'd defy anyone to find a better online account, much like your own article. MalleusFatuorum21:24, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Yeah - every time I take something to FAC I feel burned out afterwards; it takes at least 6 months before I've forgotten how much I hate it and take another one for review... Simon Burchell (talk) 21:29, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
If someone tells me how to do a spot check I'll do it. Oh and the next time you want to take a Mesoamerica article to FA or GA, please do give me a note when you begin I'd love to give a hand. Perhaps Mesoamerica is next?·ʍaunus·snunɐw·21:22, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
I think GA for that one is doable without having to expand all the child articles. Another one in need of attention is Aztec (which is also a vital article with several thousand views per day). ·ʍaunus·snunɐw·21:34, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
The truth is that there are quite a few Mesoamerican articles that I'd like to see at least at GA. For the past few years I've been plugging away but a lot of what I work on isn't that important within Mesoamerica as a whole, and I've been concentrating on the Maya, so I've ended up with GAs for things like El Chal and Motul de San José, which most people will never have heard of. I have been trying to knock the major Maya cities into shape and am half way there, I'm working sporadically on Chichen Itza with the aim of getting it to GA. But we really need some of the core subjects looked at within WP:MESO, Aztec, Zapotec, Tenochtitlan, Teotihuacan, Quetzalcoatl, Hernán Cortés, the list goes on. I think Madman had a stab at taking Olmec to GA a few years ago, so that might be a good place to start. Simon Burchell (talk) 22:06, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your consistent in depth coverage of the rich history and culture of Central America, conveying the spirit of its people, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:21, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Congratulations on a very nice article. The link checker through up a dead link, but I couldn't find it. You may want to look for it. Regards, MathewTownsend (talk) 18:11, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
I found the broken link - the Museo Reina Sofía had reorganised its website, but the content is still there - I've fixed the url. Simon Burchell (talk) 12:01, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
On 4 April 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mixco Viejo, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the ruins of the Maya city of Mixco Viejo in Guatemala received their name because they were believed to be the remains of another city entirely? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mixco Viejo.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Happy Easter, dear Simon! Let there be joy and good things in life! How is in Mexico? In past times I was very interested in cultures of Mayas and Aztecs, but I am now studing Ancient Hawaii. But I will always remember you, just as now. Be well, dear Simon! Aloha ʻOe!-Your Mychele
Oh, thank you, Simon. You lives in Mexico, I think?
advice requested
Hi,
I just signed up to review your GAN Mundo Perdido, Tikal. I recognize that it's very well written and complete regarding the material it covers. My problem is that, by concentrating so much on just the archaeological aspects, the cultural meaning and the people are left out. I read Maya stelae which was so wonderful because it combined both.
I recognize that I just don't know what I'm doing here, that you're probably writing the article in the format that it should be in, but I miss any connection to the anthropomorphic. I'm wondering if I should just withdraw from the review, or whether I should try to work with you to add some connections to the use of the sites to the actual people. (Not that I'm influenced by such things, but a radio program I listen to at night often dwells on the possibility that the Mayan calender predicts (via it's understanding of astrological positioning of its structures) the possibility the world will change in December of this year.) Now, I don't put credence in that, but apparently they were very tuned in to aspects of astronomy far ahead of their times. (I'm not a nut! - I don't think so, anyway.) Regards, MathewTownsend (talk) 22:36, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Mathew. It's very difficult to put a more "human" face on a specific architectural complex, especially with an almost complete lack of hieroglyphic text. The article as it stands is a fairly comprehensive treatment, for a broader view of what was going on one would need to look at the parent Tikal article. As for the "Maya prophecy" for this year, it is merely the ticking over of a calendrical cycle (roughly equivalent to a changing millenium). The Maya did not predict the end of the world, or even a change in the world. Indeed, their "prophecies" were linked to purely local political concerns. I'm not sure what else I could put in to demonstrate the use of the complex, its role as a short-lived royal necropolis is mentioned, and the effect of political upheavals in the city is also touched upon in the history section. If I had come across anything more, I would have put it in. In the end, in an article about an architectural complex with no documented history in an archaeological site, archaeology is what you get. So I'll leave it up to as to where you go with the review...but thanks for taking a look, whatever you decide. Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 22:51, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
ok. I was kidding about the end of the world stuff. I listen to the radio at night when I can't sleep and it's on a lot and makes me fall asleep. I don't take it seriously. I'm not into that kind of stuff, having a scientist background. MathewTownsend (talk) 23:55, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
I spent a lot of time reading the article and can see much careful work went into it. It became quite fascinating. Congratulations on another GA! Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 19:36, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Dear Simon, did some Maya kings practiced incest in marriage? Because there is a theory that one king, Itzamnaaj B'alam II, married his aunt, Lady Xok. It is believed that she was a sister of Lady Pacal, who was a mother of Xok's husband.-Your Mychele
Hi Mychele. I had a quick look at my sources and couldn't find any reference to her being the king's aunt as well as his wife - but the books I looked at are 10 years old and there may be new interpretations available - although the British Museum's website doesn't mention it either. I ran a search on Google Scholar that came back with nothing, so I have my doubts that this is true. On the other hand, it wouldn't necessarily surprise me either. So I can't help, sorry! Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 20:07, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Oh, everything's OK. I was just thinking - some Aztec kings had incestous marriages (cousin marriage or aunt-nephew marriages), so it is not impossible that some Mayan king married his cousin (or even aunt), maybe because he needed right to the throne? It seems that Lady Shok was very powerful woman, with more power then her husband and (possible) nephew. (I must notice that Lady Shok and her king didn't had children, maybe their marriage was strickly political, and if she was his aunt, they probably had marriage only "on paper". This is only my personal opinion, but I will try to find sources if they exists.)
Be well until our next meeting! :)
Your HighBeam account is ready!
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:
Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
Wow, that's impressive as a DYK! I meant to ask if you had noticed the huge recent donation of their images by the Walters Art Museum, which I have done a lot of category work on - over 1,000 Pre-Col images I think, mostly of pottery, & many suberb. See Category:Pre-Columbian_art_in_the_Walters_Art_Museum. Any chance of some articles on this stuff? Johnbod (talk) 01:24, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
An RFC you may have previously participated, [1], is seeking a Resolution. Thank you. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 15:18, 25 April 2012 (UTC), and I approve this message.
Just a thank you note for your great work on the Spanish conquest of Guatemala, it was a very enjoyable and informative read! Omegastar (talk) 14:41, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk17:26, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
I've added a bit of material on the one Russian light; I think that puts it over the 1500 char mark. Mangoe (talk) 01:31, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
DYK for Tres Islas
On 22 May 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tres Islas, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Maya archaeological site of Tres Islas in Guatemala has an alignment of monuments that imitates an architecturalgroup at Uaxactun that served as an astronomical observatory? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tres Islas.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
