Talk:J. Eric S. Thompson

Hagiography
The article is extremely favorable of Thompson who is one of the most criticized figures in Maya studies. The critics are glibly dismissed by a weird statement by Coe, who is himself one of the most vocal critics of Thompson. There needs to be much more about the way in which Thompson influenced the field and discouraged phonetic hypotheses, and advanced the flawed Yulatek hypothesis of the language of the glyphs - and also about his polemic writing style. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 17:20, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Biased description of career
No longer a hagiography, the later career part of the article has now veered towards undue and unbalanced polemics, in a style that is out of place in an encyclopedia.Retal (talk) 23:00, 20 May 2018 (UTC) Agree. Controversy details belong in a separate article about decipherment, with a sentence or two here. Non-linguistic controversies in articles about the issue. As a notable, Thompson made various discoveries and advanced various methods and interpretations. Later workers, especially on the decipherments, had controversies with him in which the senior archeologist initially hindered them and had to be proven wrong. 10-15 per cent of entry. In the arc of using colonial vs. Native perspectives -- another possible article -- Thompson went a distance, then stopped. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.234.134 (talk) 12:40, 23 October 2020 (UTC)