Talk:Tierra del Fuego

Pictures
I just added a picture of the lighthouse in Ushuaia but i am not sure if it should in fact belong to the Ushuaia article instead of here.

Pictures of Ushuaia Tierra del Fuego and Argentina can be found here :

http://www.chmouel.com/geeklog/gallery/gallery_individual.php/argentina/


 * Chmouel Boudjnah 18:19, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)


 * They'd look good on both articles, I guess. --snoyes 18:21, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I would think, but am by no means sure, that a native of Tierra del Fuego would be a English-- it sounds a bit more euphonious than "Fuegian" to me. 199.196.144.11 17:26, 6 February 2006 (UTC)Blondlieut@aol.com

Merge
I reoder the article and add a merge on Isla Grande de Tierra del Fuego - Jor70 18:43, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, the problem is that Tierra del Fuego is an archipielago, while Isla Grande is the main island in the archipielago, so technically they are not the same thing. I'm not sure they should be splet or merged, but I would leave things as they are now, since someone might add a lot of information concerning only one of them. Mariano (t/c) 07:49, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I also disagree with the merge proposal. They are not the same thing; one is a subset of the other. Warofdreams talk 21:21, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Disgree per above arguments KimvdLinde 21:28, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

First voyage of the Beagle
"Four native Fuegians, ... were brought from Tierra del Fuego by Robert Fitzroy on the first voyage of the Beagle in 1830" is not correct. It was Fitzroys first voyage with the Beagle, but not the first voyage of the Beagle. I changed it. 62.235.147.18 12:56, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Land of Fire
Tierra Del Fuego is also known to be called "Land of Fire" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.144.168.52 (talk) 20:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

I would like to point out that "Land of Fire" is an incorrect translation for "Tierra del Fuego". The problem arises with the word del. Here, del is being erroneously translated as if it were the proposition de which usually means of. However, del is actually a contraction of two words: the preposition de and the pronoun el, which means the (de + el = del). Correctly, "Tierra del Fuego" translates to "Land of the Fire". "Land of Fire" carries a connotation of abstraction, like the land is on fire, or fire is present everywhere. "Land of the fire", on the other hand, carries the connotation of a discrete fire. This parallels Magellan's own writings where he talks about seeing the hearth fires or camp fires of the native people. In fact, the word fuego is also applied to discrete hearth and camp fires in addition to fire in general. So, in its context, the best translation would be "Land of the Campfire".

Oddly enough, the incongruity of this from my experiences there in January 2004, was that the locals, when speaking English would say "Land of Fire". Noticing this, when I asked (in Spanish) a local historian in Punta Arenas about it, the correct translation was thoroughly explained to me. So, I'm not sure why even the locals aren't using the proper term. Maybe it doesn't matter, but I thought I should bring this up.Cartographer1973 (talk) 00:29, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

The missionary Thomas Bridges referred to the region as 'Fireland', and the Yahgan language as 'Firelandic'. The ethnonym Yahgan itself is an invention by Bridges, referring to the area around Yahgashaga (Yahga Channel (ashaga)) where he felt the language (five dialects worth) was 'purest'. 108.35.168.107 (talk) 00:41, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

fire land  fire  earth  ||  land  fire   earth  fire
" Tierra del Fuego (Spanish for "Land of Fire"),.......... " "...or the more literal, yet less accurate: 'Earth of Fire' ".

Thank You,

&#91;&#91; hopiakuta &#124; &#91;&#91; &#91;&#91; %c2%a1 ]] &#91;&#91; %c2%bf ]] &#91;&#91; %7e%7e ]]  %7e%7e  -]] 03:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I do want that quote added.

&#91;&#91; hopiakuta Please do  sign  your  signature  on your  message. %7e%7e  Thank You. -]] 06:00, 1 September 2007 (UTC)


 * For inclusion, a reliable source should be cited saying that's the literal, or a more literal, translation, if that's what is to be added. A google search for "earth of fire" and "tierra del fuego" shows 47 matches (16 distinct), while a search for "land of fire" and "tierra del fuego" results in 42,500 matches. Some of those are links to this wiki article and derivatives of it, so that's self-referential justification, but "earth of fire," while poetic, may not be appropriate here. Note that both "earth" and "land" have several meanings in English. -Agyle 18:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Merger with Isla Grande de Tierra del Fuego
I suggest a merge because the article about, Isla Grande de Tierra del Fuego, has a good userbox, but no information, and the articles are intended to do the same job. Comments? Spencer 01:58, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Note that a proposed merge was rejected in 2006 above in . PrimeHunter 02:24, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * IP's votes are probably invalid, but I'd oppose. They are, as also mentioned when a comparable proposal was made the last time, two separate things. Otherwise, you could prsent the same argument for merging Tierra del Fuego Province, Chile into it, too. 212.10.89.177 (talk) 14:07, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Tierra del Fuego Province, Argentina
I've filed a requested move of the article Tierra del Fuego, Antarctica, and South Atlantic Islands Province and thought people here might be interested in taking part. Thanks. Pfainuk talk 10:37, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Distance
"an archipelago 73,753 km2 (28,476 sq mi) off the southernmost tip of the South American mainland ..." The distance between the South American mainland and Tierra del Fuego is 2-dimensional? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.37.171.76 (talk) 16:55, 31 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Removed the absurdity, thanks. Vsmith (talk) 18:08, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Flora question
The text refers to fruits collected respectively by Indians and countrymen[3]

What is another possible translation for "countrymen" here? This is not a word that would be used in English in this context. Ed8r (talk) 21:25, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Naming?
Is it mentionable that English is the only major language where it is not common to translate TdF? Check out the links to the non-English wikis. Aside from English and Bahasa Indonesia, everyone says "Fjoerlân", "Feuerland", "Terre de Feu", "Terra Ignium", "Tűzföld"... samwaltz (talk) 11:08, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * No, it is not worth mentioning. Furthermore, English is full of place names from Spanish, untranslated: 98.67.162.130 (talk) 01:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

The names of species
The names of species, like the sea run brown trout and the yellow-bellied sapsucker, are common nouns, and they are not capitalized. Exception: when they contain proper nouns already, such as the Pacific bottlenose dolphin, Douglas fir, Andean condor, California gray whale, Siberean wolf, Tasmanian devil, Norfolk Island pine, Japanese beetle. Hundreds of thousands of other are just common nouns, like gorilla. 98.67.162.130 (talk) 01:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Prehistory and European exploration
In the third paragraph in this section, we find the following sentence:


 * "The very existence of Tierra del Fuego as one or more islands and not as part of Terra Australis was first inferred by Francisco de Hoces in 1525, then by Francis Drake in 1578 and in 1616 by a Dutch VOC expedition which named Cape Horn."

Did Francis Drake and a Dutch VOC also "infer" the existence of Tierra del Fuego? Was the existence of Tierra del Fuego inferred, then inferred again, and inferred a third time? Does the verb "infer" apply to all three -- de Hoces, Drake, and a Dutch VOC? If it applies only to de Hoces, then another verb (such as "then confirmed by", or "then mapped by", or "further confirmed by") ought to be inserted before Francis Drake.CorinneSD (talk) 19:38, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Prehistory and European exploration
In the second paragraph in this section, we read the following sentence:


 * "He believed he was seeing the many fires (fuego in Spanish) of the Yaghan, which were visible from the sea and that the "Indians" were waiting in the forests to ambush his armada."

I was looking at the old photograph at the right whose caption is "Selknam men hunting". I clicked on the photo to enlarge it. There is a more extensive "caption" below the larger photo. Among other things, it says that Tierra del Fuego was named when Magellan saw the fires of the Selk'nam people. That conflicts with the information in the statement I copied from the article, above. I don't know if it is important, but if it is, perhaps someone could correct one of them (or change it to "the fires of the Yaghan and the Selk'nam people", thereby including both).

Also, I wonder why the caption under that old photograph at the right side of the article page says, "Selknam men hunting" (with no apostrophe after "Selk"), while in both the article and the large "caption" under the photo when expanded, or enlarged, it says "Selk'nam". Shouldn't the caption reflect the spelling in the article? If it should, I do not know how to change the caption.

Now that I've read further in the article, I have found more examples of "Selknam" (without the apostrophe), so someone needs to decide which spelling to use -- Selk'nam or Selknam -- and edit for consistency.CorinneSD (talk) 19:53, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Colonialization and extinction of native Americans
I have two questions:

1) In the second paragraph in this section, we read the following sentences:


 * ""An 1879 Chilean expedition led by Ramón Serrano Montaner reported large amounts of placer gold in the streams and river beds of Tierra del Fuego. This prompted a massive immigration to Isla Grande de Tierra del Fuego from 1883 and 1909."

The second sentence is not clear. Specifically, "from 1883 and 1909" does not make sense. Was it:


 * from 1883 to 1909
 * in two waves, beginning in 1883 and in 1909
 * beginning in 1883

or something else?

2) At the end of the second paragraph in this section, we read,


 * "The Selknam and Yaghan populations of Tierra del Fuego declined sharply due to persecution by settlers, diseases to which they had no natural immunity and mass transfer to the Salesian mission on Dawson Island, where despite the missionaries' efforts many perished."

I feel there is some ambiguity here. Did the Selknam and Yaghan populations...decline sharply due to three causes:


 * persecution by settlers
 * diseases to which they had no natural immunity, and
 * mass transfer to the Salesian mission on Dawson Island?

If it was just three distinct causes, I would add a comma after "no natural immunity".

Or was the "mass transfer to the Salesian mission on Dawson Island" a direct consequence of the native people becoming sick with infectious diseases (in order to isolate them and prevent further spread of the diseases, or perhaps also to help them recover)?

Right now, there is no indication of a connection between the native people's contracting the diseases and their mass transfer to Dawson Island. If there is a connection, I think it should be indicated, somehow. CorinneSD (talk) 01:23, 22 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Corinne,
 * in Tierra del Fuego gold rush they say Between 1883 and 1906.... That is From ... to ....
 * For the second question I didn't find a answer, but mass transfer can't be the cause of decline because it is only a transfer and not a killing. So, there are only two reasons: persecution and diseases.
 * Much of the text has been added by editors whose first language is not English. --Best regards, Keysanger (what?) 13:24, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank-you. Of course you are right, that there are only two reasons, or causes, for the decline in numbers.  I'll wait and see if someone can add some information as to whether the transfer was directly connected to the diseases contracted by the natives, or, perhaps, do some research on my own.CorinneSD (talk) 16:08, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

The United States South Seas Exploring Expedition of 1838-1842 went there.
I am currently in the process of reading the entire set of logs, and the ships all stop there and study the island and make contact with the natives. There are a lot of observations about the natives but they don't seem too scientific by today's standards. Regardless information regarding this could be very beneficial to the natives section. I don't know if America arrived before or after the Spanish countries, but the dates are all available in the transcript. If this does not qualify as a source then I don't know what would. http://archive.org/stream/unitedstatesexpl01unitrich/unitedstatesexpl01unitrich_djvu.txt ---  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.55.44.198 (talk) 11:04, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tierra del Fuego. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110717051438/http://www.tierradelfuego.gov.ar/historia/ihistoria.php to http://www.tierradelfuego.gov.ar/historia/ihistoria.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:29, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Not mentioned
^^^^^ the complete extinction of the Husch is not even mentioned.... the local indios have been almost completely killed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.43.195.18 (talk) 10:51, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

use of the word "extinction" to describe deaths of the natives
This seems inappropriate. Extinction is typically reserved for nonhumans. In this context, due to European colonizers invading and killing the natives, "genocide" appears to be a more appropriate term. Thoughts? 151.200.244.232 (talk) 00:03, 12 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I disagree that “extinction” is typically reserved for nonhumans, but I also think it is inaccurate in this case since the native populations didn’t go extinct. The body text discusses the causes, including genocide of the native populations, so maybe “depopulation” as a broader term? SonderofWhales (talk) 03:40, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree, extinction is the wrong word. I assume what is meant is there are no longer any full blooded people from any of the groups, but I assume there are plenty of half or quarter blooded. Have a look at the Moriori article and how that is phrased, the same thing happened to them. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 03:48, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

The Former The Western Half
My edit uses parallel construction so that the first portion of the island discussed belongs to the first country discussed, and the second portion of the island the belonging to the second country. It also eliminates the awkward sentence structure noted above, which if misread suggests the western half no longer exists. –Zfish118⋉talk 19:28, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * You have accused me of edit warring. I will wait for your discussion here on this matter. –Zfish118⋉talk 22:06, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree with Roger 8 Roger; the original version was better. I've had a play with it and can't clarify the wording without making it more clunky. Graham87 (talk) 04:13, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I cannot see anything awkward or misleading about what was there before your change, Ffish118. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 05:33, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

I think Zfish118's version is much clearer. It is unambiguous, is not clunky, and avoids potentially confusing terms (former, latter) which may not be clear to a reader who does not speak English as a first language. Masato.harada (talk) 09:11, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * This is an English language encyclopedia. Former and latter are common English words. There is a wikipedia site written in simple learner level English which you might find useful if encyclopedic English is a struggle. I've looked again at the two versions. Both are fine and quite clear. The second version is a change fr the sake of change IMO.Roger 8 Roger (talk) 09:26, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I've tried to rework it, based on the geography section. It turns out dividing the main island into "halves" isn't quite accurate in the first place. Graham87 (talk) 14:42, 15 December 2023 (UTC)