Talk:Maya calendar/Archives/2011/February

Lock this article
This article and the Long Count article are getting vandalized about ten times a day and the rest of the recent contributions are mostly un-helpful original research. These articles have been developed over a long time and have become high-quality and stable. Perhaps an administrator should protect or semi-protect these since those of us who patrol them are having to revert malicious editing many times a day. Senor Cuete (talk) 23:58, 19 November 2009 (UTC)Senor Cuete


 * I've added a request to semi-protect this article to Requests for page protection. I don't feel there is enough recent anonymous vandalism for semi-protection of Mesoamerican Long Count calendar. You are free to add your own request if you disagree. — Joe Kress (talk) 20:03, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * My request was denied due to a lack of enough recent vandalism. — Joe Kress (talk) 20:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I requested semi-protection and now it is semi-protected for ONE WEEK! Senor Cuete (talk) 20:59, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Senor Cuete


 * The recent spike in vandalism over the last two days was probably enough to approve the request. — Joe Kress (talk) 01:43, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Dear Sirs: There are no Maya Communities in the Mexican state of Oaxaca! Many other portions of your existing Maya Calendar page are clearly in error! Not all who edit Wikipedia pages are ignorant of the literature on the subject. Deleting changes backed by well known and accepted historical sources does not speak well for your editor or your editorial policy. (Sincerly, James B Porter PhD).

James: The reference to Oaxaca was badly written so it sounded to you like it was saying that there are Maya in that state. This was not the intent. What was meant was that some ethnic group was using the Tzolk'in there. I have wondered about that statement. A reference would be very helpful. Otherwise it could be removed. Making massive changes to an article that has been the result of years of consensus building, adding text with almost no reference to reliable sources is not the way to edit Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not an argument about whether your degree is bigger than some other editor's. "Not all who edit Wikipedia pages are ignorant of the literature on the subject" so I guess you are implying that you are extremely knowledgeable about this subject. Too bad an argument of authority means nothing. Discussing proposed changes on the talk page before editing it is the best way to improve an article. Don't worry about getting your edits reverted because this is not your article (or mine). If this troubles you, you shouldn't be editing Wikipedia. Senor Cuete (talk) 00:09, 2 February 2011 (UTC)Senor Cuete