Talk:Middle America (Americas)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Controversies 2 Middle America and other regions 3 Mesoamerica 4 Usage

[edit] Controversies

The article needs a Controversies/Usage section to avoid future edit wars in this and related articles. JC February 25 2007 12:30 (PST)

It only needs one if someone can source and demonstrate said controversies. Corticopia 20:33, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Middle Ameirca and Northern America are English terms, there is no terms in Spanish (the official language of the Middle American countries), in fact such regions dont exist in the involved countries. The CIA fackbook just shows Mexico as part of Middle America but none Central American country is included. JC February 25 2007 12:40 (PST)

And? This is an English encyclopedia -- and a number of sources support the content. Corticopia 20:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

That's why I suggested to include a Controversies/Usage section (Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Bias). JC February 25 2007 13:00 (PST)

I have restored the original article location/redirect, since the original article was created at Middle America (Americas) -- it is the middle region of America, after all, and also in southern North America. I suggest a requested/proposed move to determine the article's final location instead of back-and-forth editing. Corticopia 13:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

No, most sources states Middle America as a North American region. You must followed your own suggestion, the original link of this articule is Middle America (North America), and You changed it and moved it without any request.JC February 26 2007 07:45 (PST)

Sources indicate that it is a region of the Americas. It is indisputably reckoned as part of North America (no issue), but it is inaccurate to have the article live there primarily because Colombia and Venezuela are sometimes included too. By the mere virtue of the term, ... Americas is both neutral and verifiable. Corticopia 17:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Again most sources indicates Middle America as a North American region, just one includes sometimes Colombia and Venezuela. To finish this foolish discusion I suggest to choose one of the follow 2 descriptions to be the short description in Middle America (disambiguation).

• Middle America (North America), a region in the mid-latitudes of the Americas.
• Middle America (Americas), a region in southern North America.

JC February 27 2007 09:50 (PST)

Yes: this is rather foolish. There's one more option; just:

• Middle America (Americas)

without a qualifier, or similar. Of course, other descriptions in the disambiguation also have to be minimal, too. And, again, to have the article live elsewhere may be partial.  ::::Corticopia 22:37, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Indeed it is :). There's one more option; just like the last one:

• Middle America (North America)

without a qualifier, or similar. A consensus should determinate this. JC February 27 2007 15:42 (PST)

Hence me saying "or similar"; however, your 2nd proposal is not exactly the same, since 'Americas' is all-inclusive. Anyhow, if I had to choose, my preference is for Mid and mid, but (in this disambiguation), I can fully live with:

• Middle America (Americas), a region in southern North America.

However, the lead of the article should remain as is. Corticopia 23:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Middle America and other regions

Since there is no consensus about what region is North of "Middle America" (could be Northern America or North America) and since most of the definitions do not include a reference (saying that includes Mexico, CA and the Caribbean is enough), I think there should be no indication of the "borders" of this geographical (not geopolitical) region. I changed the article already. Also the inclusion of the false argument that this is a geopolitical region is wrong. A geopolitical region is formed when the governments of the countries involved share an agenda or decide to unite each other. This is not the case. Middle America is a geographical term only, while, for example, Central America is both a geographical and geopolitical region. This is proved when most of the definitions mention Central America instead of listing each of the 7 countries in the region. AlexCovarrubias ^{( Let's talk! )} 06:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? You are trying to play both sides of the coin, while satisfying neither and obfuscating the issue. You say that Middle America is not defined, yet numerous sources have been provided: the region includes Mexico, the countries of Central America (i.e., the southerly mainland of North America), usually the West Indies, and sometimes Colombia and Venezuela. Those are territories in the mid-latitudes of the Americas. You also say that Northern America is not defined, but that article is quite clear -- it is north of Middle America. You also assert that North America is ill-defined, but we all now what the respective sources say. That is why indicating it MA within the Americas (and hence the article title) is both impartial and correct. As for MA being a geopolitical region (I didn't add that), that is not necessarily precise -- it merely needs to be noted as a region (as per the numerous sources). Corticopia 12:41, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't say that Middle America is not well defined, nor Northern America. I said that there is no need to include that, because north of MA can be North America (When meaning US and Canada) or Northern America (US, Canada and the islands). And yes, the article Northern America says it is north of Middle America, because YOU introduced that information. AlexCovarrubias ^{( Let's talk! )} 13:07, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

And? Again, you are not making sense. By this account, you just demonstrated why we should not say that Middle America is in North America first (but in the Americas) because NA may or may not include Mexico. You can't have it both ways. Corticopia 13:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I see your point, however I think you did't see mine. As I already told you in your talk page, I concede. There are different ways to geographically divide the American continent, this is one. However, please also concede that Mesoamerica is not a synonim of nowadays Middle America. Mesoamerica is a broadly used term in english, and the translation to Middle America is not that common. Thanks. AlexCovarrubias ^{( Let's talk! )} 13:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Actually, I saw your point -- what I've taken issue with is editions and removal of cited information (here and elsewhere) to support a viewpoint; I've generally not done so or have corrected for said edits immediately afterward (sometimes a challenge in the middle of edit warring). And while there are various ways to divide the Americas, you (previously) glazed over the crux/reason for my original edits: to place Mesoamerica in the mid-latitudes of the Americas... I don't necessarily, and have never firmly said, that Mesoamerica and MA are synonoyms and the same (though etymologically they may be and I'm sure a case can be built for that and there's a deeper relationship between the two terms) -- but that is called being polemic. Corticopia 00:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mesoamerica

In the paragraph dedicated to explain the rare use of Middle America as a translation for Mesoamerica, Corticopia decided to describe it as a "region within Middle America", which is confusing and not enterely true, because Mesoamerica is an historical term that could be described some other ways:

• A cultural region of North America
• A cultural region of southern North America
• A cultural region in the mid-latitudes of the Americas
• A cultural region comprising central Mexico to northern Central America
• A cultural region of the American continent

My point is, we should wait to see what the result is in the article Mesoamerica, where a debate is going on about the definition that should be used in the article. And however, I don't think that a whole description of the term is needed in this article, because it is included as a reference, for the user not to confuse it with nowadays Middle America. AlexCovarrubias ^{( Let's talk! )} 13:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

My edit was to clarify that (ethnohistoric) Mesoamerica is distinct from but situated in Middle America -- the Dow citation supports this unambiguously: "Mesoamerica is a sub-area of Middle America". What happens in that article should not really have a bearing per se on this article (topical; merits assessed as needed): after all, this is an article about the region of Middle America. Corticopia 16:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Usage

I stumbled across the entry for "American" in The Oxford Companion to the English Language (p. 35), part of which reads:

• A Brazilian is South American and Latin American, but not, in English, American; a Canadian is a North American, but not an American. Costa Ricans and Nicaraguans are Central Americans or Meso-Americans, but not Middle Americans, who are typical US citizens (whether they live in Kansas or Hawaii). The term Pan-American refers to the hemisphere, while All-American is used only of the US (for whatever is characteristic of the whole country and excludes foreign elements). ...

Thus, in an attempt to equitably reconcile this information with current content, I've appropriately edited the article. Corticopia 15:01, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

In my quest to determine the etymology of Middle America, I have done some limited research. The Merriam-Webster dictionary indicates the term originated in 1841; after some searching online, it appears that John Lloyd Stephens [1] -- an American traveller and archaeologist -- researched Maya ruins in the region (1839–40 and 1841–42) and whose research was instrumental to the archaeological study of Middle America. The report of his first expedition, Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan, 2 vol. (1841) caused 'a storm of popular and scholarly interest' precipitating renewed study of the lands of the Maya later inhabited by Spanish conquerors and explorers. (See this link with some info about a weird Mormon theory.) Whether or not this is when and how the term originated, I can't say for sure ... but (if so) it appears that my initial hunch -- an etymological connection between Middle America and Mesoamerica -- may be valid. Call this whatever you wish for now -- I only offer it as information. Anyhow ...Corticopia 14:53, 18 March 2007 (UTC)