Talk:Chunchucmil

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Mesoamerica, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to pre-Columbian Mesoamerica, its civilizations, history, accomplishments and other topics. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
Resources and guidelines for editing Mesoamerica-related articles:
NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritising and managing its workload.
A This article has been rated as A-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the Project's importance scale.
WikiProject Mesoamerica priority open tasks: (click "show" to expand)
Peer review Chunchucmil has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Contents

[edit] Citations

Hi Chunc and dan, many thanks for your superb work and collaboration on this article. I note that in an earlier version you had trialled the citation auto-footnoting capability of wikimedia here. While the presently adopted Harvard (author, year) citation style is perfectly fine and probably does not need to be altered, in case you guys would like to apply the auto-footnotes to other articles, Wikipedia:Footnotes provides guidelines on how to implement this (also known as "cite.php"). Basically, there are two elements to generating an auto-numbered system of footnotes/citations.

The first is to enclose the footnote/citation (eg "Bloggs (2006), pp.123–125.") at the place in the text where the footnote number is to appear between <ref> and </ref> tags. The closing tag needs a backslash, ie works like HTML tagging.

The second is to add the instruction for the wikimedia software to generate the auto-numbered footnote list, at the place where this is to appear, usually in a separate section near the end called ==Notes==. The instruction is <references/>, which can (optionally) itself be enclosed by <div class="references-small"><references/></div> to make them appear in a smaller font.

Directly underneath the "Notes" section comes the "References" section containing the usual listing of the full expanded works cited.

Once again, great work!--cjllw | TALK 03:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! I had tried using the auto-footnote system, but ended up deleting about 70% of the article. When I have a moment, or perhaps when DH does, we'll give it go. While we both prefer the harvard style (too much academic writing), we understand that wikipedia articles tend to use footnote referencing style. As our goal is to get Chunchucmil article to GA, A, or even FA status, I think we'll work on this to make it more congruous with accepted wiki-styles. Oaxaca dan 03:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey all, just chiming in to say that I would MUCH prefer to use the "Harvard Style" (paranthetical) references, rather than footnotes, in our Chunchucmil article. As long as both are accepted in Wikipedia, I hope this won't be a point against us in going for GA or FA status. PLEASE let us know if it is an issue.Chunchucmil 21:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Chun, I think there's away to use harvard style while still linking to the citations below... I think I've seen it done before... anyone know? Oaxaca dan 22:07, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Per Wikipedia:Harvard referencing, the Harvard style is one of the perfectly acceptable citation methods in wikipedia, and its proper implementation here would pose no barrier to any future GA or FA nomination. The implementation in the article as of now is reasonably complete as it stands, and IMO there'd be no requirement to do anything further other than add in a few more if warranted.
Re dan's query, there is indeed a facility to hyperlink the (Bloggs, 2006) inline cites so that the reader can jump directly to that particular source in the "references" section. It is (or should be) optional, but equally would be relatively straightforward to implement. You would just need to put the inline cites and reference biblio entries into particular templates designed for the purpose- these are described at Wikipedia:Harvard citation template examples and citation templates. I'd be more than happy to help out implementing this, if you guys think it is something which would be good to do. Let me know your preferences here. Cheers, --cjllw | TALK 00:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Some additional review comments

Hi dan and Chun/DH- seeing as how there was unfortunately only a minimal response to the Peer Review request (alas there's generally quite a backlog there, and 'specialist' topics like this often find it hard to attract volunteer reviewers), I've made some additional observations and comments. See below, these are with a view to helping out in preparation for a future FA nomination; if you've the time you might wish to review and consider these.

  1. The article's opening para says "virtually no [stelae or other grand monuments] have been found there". This implies perhaps a couple such monuments have been recovered- are the details of these finds worth mentioning, could they be added here?
  2. The CMHI has a code for a site at Maxcanu (MXC). Is this site related to Chunchucmil at all, or even is it 'part of' the overall complex, or at least nearby? Are there current or former site designations for areas included in Chunchucmil's sprawl?
  3. If Maxcanu has a CMHI code then that could presumably imply some kind of inscriptions have been recorded for the site. Any ideas what these are? Does Chunchucmil itself completely lack any evidence for inscriptions, calendar dates etc? If so, how usual/unusual is this for sites in that region/time period?
  4. Are there any archaeological phases /ceramic complexes defined for the site?
  5. Maybe some more detail on how Chunchucmil's known occupational history compares with chronologies established for other nearby / significant sites (if possible)
  6. Is there anything more which could be usefully expanded on the architecture/style of the site's structures- typical or atypical for the region/timeperiod?
  7. Maybe the major structure complexes at the site (some are mentioned in img captions) could be mentioned/listed by name
  8. Any known burials could perhaps be expanded on /described (given the 'subsistence' section implies skeletons from the site have been analysed)
  9. Any notable artefacts, motifs or other artworks (incl. ceramics) retrieved from the site which could be mentioned / described?
  10. What is the general state of the site's preservation? Has it suffered much from looting and/or encroachment?
  11. Maybe a brief precis of the main excavations could be added; has there been any restorative work undertaken?
  12. The images are great, perhaps some of them could be resized or repositioned a bit- for eg the detailed map of the Chunchucmil area would be better enlarged so it can be read without having to open it up separately. The reconstructions could also look better enlarged. Might have to play around a bit with the layout to see what works and what crowds out the surrounding text. (Incidentally, I'd say the reconstruction imgs would have a fair chance of being 'passed' as a Featured picture...)
  13. Minor stylistic point- some expressions like "see above" or "as previously mentioned" can become a little redundant in wikipedia, as there's no guarantee the text won't get shifted around or even altered at some point in the future. If you need to refer to something covered, it may be safer to refer to the ext source/reference, at least in addition to referring to some other portion of the article's text.
  14. As mentioned above (note irony!), Harvard referencing should not be a prob for an FA nomination. We could still implement the templates which would hyperlink the inline cite to the relevant reference, if desired.
  15. Additional data such as ISSN, ISBN, doi, and/or url could be provided for some of the references themselves in the biblio (optional, but sometimes FA reviewers can be picky)
  16. In the "references", The Pakbeh Regional Economy Program: Report of the 2004 Field Season is given twice, with two different publication years (2005 & 2006). Should the title of the second mention be ''Pakbeh Regional Economy Program: Report of the 2005 Field Season ..? fixed
  17. What is the association of the name pakbeh with the site (I gather the research project was renamed to that to avoid a little squabbling by neighbouring municipios)- ie is it actually a regional designation taking in more than Chunchucmil or just something bestowed by the proj. team? Also (just for my own curiosity), is the glyph block used like an insignia on the project's site spelling out "pakbeh" taken from some inscription somewhere, or is it modern?
  18. Can or has Chunchucmil been grouped in any larger regional designation (ie some arch. sub-zoning of nthn Yucatan)? Would calling it a Puuc site be appropriate?
  19. A site map, similar to the one at the project's site [1], would be a nice-to-have, demonstrates the intricate and extensive layout
  20. From that site map there doesn't seem to be a predominating alignment of the quadrangles and structures in any particular direction..? Usual or unusual for the region/timeperiod?
  21. Are there many or any other Maya sites known to have had significant "commercial centres"? Any comparable (in function) sites, in Maya or non-Maya Mesoamerica?
  22. Maybe a little more expansion on what a "multepal" polity entails (although I guess it's reasonably easy to deduce)

That's about it for now- once again, kudos to the two of you for an excellently developed and interesting article! Cheers, --cjllw | TALK 04:30, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

very quickly (as I'm about to shut off the comp), on behalf of Chun and I, thank you profusely Cjllw. This was exactly the sort of response we were hoping for when we sent it to peer-review, but did not receive (getting lost in the shuffle over there). You povide some very good points, a couple of which, especially concerning the chronology and ironing out ceramic data, are things project members are currently discussing. I'm sure Chun will chime in shortly, and we'll get cracking on this. Thanks again! -- Oaxaca dan 05:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes, THANK YOU! Those are excellent comments, and hit right to the heart of what makes Chunchucmil so interesting. As oaxaca_dan said, we've been having offline conversations about some of these topics with the other archaeologists who work at Chunchucmil. This is a great time to review the items you mentioned. THANKS AGAIN! Chunchucmil 21:14, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey, no problem. I've added a couple more points I thought of subsequently (Nos. 17-22 in the now-ordered list), just to keep you guys busy....!--cjllw | TALK 09:00, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow, CJLLW, you are quite astute regarding our project name (your comment #17). Not many have picked up on that. The term Pakbeh was (as you surmised) invented by the project so that we would not antagonize local villagers who objected to the site being named after a town that does not technically "own" the whole site. The logo on the web page you saw (spelling "Pakbeh" using the ancient Maya glyphs) was designed by me with the help of Victoria Bricker, and is a complete fiction (as is the name of our project). You can email me (I think I've activated that feature on my signature page) and I'll tell you what it means, but the project director likes to treat it like an "easter egg" so we keep that under our hats. As for your other comments, they are golden. Thanks for your input. Chunchucmil 21:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and as for your comment #20 (site orientation), you are generally correct that there is no single orientation to the major groups. However, they do "tend" to have an orientation rotated to be perpendicular to the coast and other natural ecological zones (slightly "clockwise" from the cardinal directions). And while some quadrangle groups face various directions, the majority have a pyramid on the east side, facing west. This is not enough data to comment on any possible intent by the ancient Maya, so I would not include it in this article. And as for comment #18, the site should be lumped with other "northern plains" sites (Dzibilchaltun, Ake, Mayapan, etc.) DEFINITELY not Puuc. As for Maxcanu, it can be found just down-hill from Oxkintok. It's a modern town, but sits on top of some ancient remains. The CMHS is just noting some carved stones or painted caves in or around the modern town. It's not in any way part of Chunchucmil. The nearest site that may be noted in various publications (besides ours) is Santa Barbara. It is a northern plains site with Puuc architecture (probably sprang up after the fall of Chunchucmil). It is mentioned in surveys of Puuc architecture, and did (at one time) have a mural that was reported. A colleague of ours worked up there for a while, and posted his results to the FAMSI website. But, again, it is not a part of Chunchucmil - just a regional site on the outskirts of Chunchucmil's hinterland. Chunchucmil 21:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

moved entire reference section here per my note -- Oaxaca dan 18:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I was going to redo the citation list so its a straight up list, but I don't know - its pretty dense, and its hard to find articles among all the text - I've deleted the previous list and posted it below. Should we go with this list, or leave it as it was (cut up into different sections)? -- Oaxaca dan 18:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Ardren, Traci (editor) (2000) The Chunchucmil Regional Economy Project: Report of the 1999 Field Season. Department of Anthropology, Florida State University, Tallahassee
  • Ashmore, Wendy (1981) Some Issues of Method and Theory in Lowland Maya Settlement Archaeology. In Lowland Maya Settlement Patterns, edited by W. Ashmore, pp. 37-70. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
  • Beach, Tim (1998) Soil Constraints on Northwest Yucatan: Pedoarchaeology and Subsistence at Chunchucmil. Geoarchaeology 13(8):759-791.
  • Clark, John E. (1997) Prismatic blademaking, craftsmanship, and production: an analysis of obsidian refuse from Ojo de Agua, Chiapas, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 8:137-159.
  • Clark, John E., and Douglas D. Bryant (1997) Technological typology of prismatic blades and debitage from Ojo de Agua, Chiapas, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 8: 111-136.
  • Dahlin, Bruce H. (2000) The Barricade and Abandonment of Chunchucmil: Implications for Northern Maya Warfare. Latin American Antiquity 11(3):283-298.
  • —— (2003) Chunchucmil: A Complex Economy in NW Yucatan. Mexicon XXV:129-138.
  • Dahlin, Bruce H. , Anthony P. Andrews, Tim Beach, Clara Bezanilla, Patrice Farrell, Sheryl Luzzadder-Beach, and Valerie McCormick (1998) Punta Canbalam in Context: A Peripatetic Coastal Site in Northwest Campeche, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 9(1):1-16.
  • Dahlin, Bruce H. and Traci Ardren (2002) Modes of Exchange and Their Effects On Regional and Urban Patterns at Chunchucmil, Yucatan, Mexico. In Ancient Maya Political Economies, edited by M. A. Masson and D. Freidel, pp. 249-284. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek CA.
  • Dahlin, Bruce H., Timothy Beach, Sheryl Luzzadder-Beach, David R. Hixson, Scott R. Hutson, Aline Magnoni, Eugenia B. Mansell, and Daniel E. Mazeau (2005) Reconstructing Agricultural Self-Sufficiency at Chunchucmil, Yucatán, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 16(2):1-19.
  • Dahlin, Bruce H., B. Leyden, M. Brenner, J. Curtis, D. Piperno, and T. Whitmore (1996) A Record of Long and Short-Term Climatic Variation from Northwest Yucatan: Cenote San Jose Chulchaca. In The Managed Mosaic: Ancient Maya Agriculture and Resource Use, edited by S.. Fedick. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
  • Dahlin, Bruce H., and Daniel E. Mazeau (editors) (2002) The Pakbeh Regional Economy Program: Report of the 2001 Field Season. Department of Sociology/Anthropology, Howard University, Washington D.C.
  • —— (2004) The Pakbeh Regional Economy Program: Report of the 2002 Field Season. Department of Sociology/Anthropology, Howard University, Washington D.C.
  • Farrell, Patrice, Timothy Beach, and Bruce H. Dahlin (1996) Under the Roots of the Chukum Tree: A Preliminary Soil Analysis of the Chunchucmil Region, Yucatan/Campeche, Mexico. Yearbook, Conference of Latin American Geographers 22:41-50.
  • Garza Tarazona de Gonzalez, Silvia, and Edward B. Kurjack (1980) Atlas Arqueoiogico del Estado de Yucatan. 2 vols. Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia, Gentro Regional del Sureste. Mexico D.F.
  • Hirth, Kenneth G. (1998) The Distributional Approach: A New Way to Identify Marketplace Exchange in the Archaeological Record. Current Anthropology 39: 451-476.
  • Hutson, Scott R., David R. Hixson, and Bruce H. Dahlin (editors) (2005) The Pakbeh Regional Economy Program: Report of the 2004 Field Season.
  • —— (2006) The Pakbeh Regional Economy Program: Report of the 2005 Field Season.
  • Hutson, Scott R., Aline Magnoni, Daniel E. Mazeau and Travis W. Stanton (2006) The Archaeology of Urban Houselots at Chunchucmil, Yucatan, Mexico. In Lifeways in the Northern Lowlands: New Approaches to Maya Archaeology, edited by J. P. Mathews and B. A. Morrison pp. 77-92. University of Arizona Press., Tucson.
  • Hutson, Scott R., Aline Magnoni and Travis Stanton (2004) House Rules?: the Practice of Social Organization in Classic Period Chunchucmil, Yucatan, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 15:74-92.
  • Kurjack, Edward B. and E. Wyllys Andrews V (1976) Early Boundary Maintenance in Northwest Yucatan, Mexico. American Antiquity 41:318-325.
  • Luzzadder-Beach, Sheryl (2000) Water Resources of the Chunchucmil Maya. The Geographical Review 90(4):493-510.
  • Magnoni, Aline, Scott R. Hutson, Eugenia Mansell, and Travis W. Stanton (2004) La Vida Doméstica Durante el Periodo Clásico en Chunchucmil, Yucatán. In XVII Simposio de Investigaciones Arqueológicas en Guatemala, 2003, edited by J. P. Laporte, H. Escobedo, and B. Arroyo, pp. 991-1006. Museo Nacional de Arqueología y Etnología, Guatemala.
  • Sharer, Robert J. and Loa P. Traxler (2006) The Ancient Maya (6th Ed.). Stanford University Press, Stanford.
  • Stanton, Travis W. (editor) (2000) The Pakbeh Regional Economy Program: Report of the 2000 Field Season. Social Science and Business Division, Jamestown Community College, Jamestown, NY
  • Stephens, John L. (1962 [1843]) Incidents of Travel in Yucatán (2 vol.). University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.
  • Vlcek, D. T. (1978) Muros de Delimitacion Residencial en Chunchucmil. Boletin de la Escuela de Ciencias, Antropologicas de la Universidad de Yucatan 28:55-64.
  • Vlcek, D. T., Silvia Garza de Gonzalez, and Edward B. Kurjack (1978) Contemporary Farming and Ancient Maya Settlements: Some Disconcerting Evidence. In Pre-Hispanic Maya Agriculture, edited by P. D. Harrison and B. L. Turner II, pp. 211-223. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
  • Wilk, Richard R. (1988) Maya Household Organization: Evidence and Analogies. In Household and Community in the Mesoamerican Past, edited by W. Ashmore, pp. 135-151. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
  • Varela Torrecilla, Carmen (1990) Un nuevo complejo en la secuencia cerámica de Oxkintok: El Clásico Medio. Oxkintok 3:113-126. Madrid
Hi dan. On balance I think it is better to take out the annotating subheads as you've done above, and have the references list as a straight-out alphasorted biblio.
I do see what you mean about the denseness of the text obscuring the authors' names keywords. In the past my 'solution' has been to use the {{aut}} template to Small Caps the names so they are easier to pick out. Maybe we could also omit the authors' names after the first occurence if they've more than one work here (substituting say with  ——— ). Inserting linebreaks between entries may also help.
It's a pity that there's no simple and standard way to achieve something like outdenting the names from the rest of the cite, like you very frequently see in printed works. Or at least, I haven't come across one yet.--cjllw | TALK 07:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Good idea - I did it above - I think its alright. What I would like to do is format according to your template with the small caps, which I really like. I'll go dig that out and see if I can apply it. -- Oaxaca dan 13:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
I've put in the {aut} template calls, and spaced the entries. We should also probably use the citation templates for the full citation string. On reflection, I think that substituting repetitions of the lead authors' names is done if they are the only author, or where all coauthors are the same (in which case all the coauthors' names may be substituted as well), so I've amended this too.
What do you think? Some improvement, but possibly not ideal- this is a complicated case with the same authors reappearing in multiple configurations. Maybe the authors' names could be bolded as well...?
I had earlier experimented with other presentational forms - see for example Trepanation_in_Mesoamerica#References. This has its appeal as well, but might produce and equally long or longer listing.--cjllw | TALK 00:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I like it - thanks for your work Cjll - Yeah, I don't know if anything will be ideal with this, other then adding extra spaces between the citations to create greater visual differences, but even then, that will probably look weird. Using the dashes for duplicate artile authors is good, but the problem is that most of our articles have a slew of rotating authors, and not everyone is on every article - oh well, what can you do?
Thanks again Cjll! -- Oaxaca dan 00:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I know I'm coming late to this discussion, sorry to not be involved earlier, but I really like the Trepanation_in_Mesoamerica#References version. However, since Oaxaca_Dan has gone to such great lengths to set up the current version (which is PERFECTLY FINE), I see no real reason to change. Great job guys. Chunchucmil 15:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Location

Need the latitude and longitude (and preferably altitude) of this site, as sites such as Tikal have. grr (talk) 02:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)