Talk:Crystal River Archaeological State Park

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Crystal River Archaeological State Park. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:36, 3 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Crystal River Archaeological State Park. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:38, 15 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

I’ve got evidence that the ancient Mayans built Crystal River.

edit

There is evidence that the ancient Mayans built the site of Crystal River. Epictrex (talk) 19:03, 28 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Lets see the CITATIONS, so it can be evaluated for reliability and WP:FRINGE. Mainstream academic sources. Heiro 19:16, 28 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
But just to give you an example of where this issue stands with the academic community, see Archaeology Magazines] take on the subject. "Don't believe the internet. An upright slab of limestone incised with a crude human-like figure was found at the site in 1964. This "stele," together with the temple mounds, plaza, and the site's exotic artifacts, have led a host of New Age web surfers to posit direct ties between Crystal River and the lowland Maya region or the Veracruz coast. Milanich and others reject that contention, saying there is no credible evidence for pre-Columbian contact between Florida and Mesoamerica.". Heiro 19:29, 28 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Ancient Mayan pottery with ancient Mayan glyphs have been uncovered at Crystal River. Check the articles on lostworlds.org and mayainamerica.org.Epictrex (talk) 19:33, 28 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Neither of those websites are considered WP:RELIABLE as citations on Wikipedia. If you doubt this assertions, please ask at WP:RSN. Heiro 19:39, 28 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
Did you read or even check out some of their articles? Epictrex (talk) 19:44, 28 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
I did. The second is a blog and an advertisement for a book, and it cites the first. Blogs and advertisements are not RS's. The first is not supported by any academic cites to actual archaeologists. Both seem to be the work of Gary Daniels, who is not an archaeologist. He does not excavate sites or publish academic papers in reputable scientific journals. He is a "media producer with a background in television production and interactive design" who runs a website. lostworlds dot org is little better than ancientorigins dot net. They promote pseudoscience. You can take this to the reliable sources admin notice board here, WP:RSN, for a second opinion if you like. Heiro 20:02, 28 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
Oh, I see now. I understand now. So I can’t use blogs then. Epictrex (talk) 20:07, 28 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
No, blogs are not an RS. Neither are websites with uncited articles written by tv producers instead of accredited archaeologists. I've started this Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#lostworlds.org at RSN. Heiro 21:00, 28 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Epictrex: Hiero is correct. Doug Weller talk 12:44, 30 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
Also, User:Epictrex, per WP:SIG, please do not remove your SIG from comments leaving only a date stamp. Other editors need to know who is in the conversation. Imagine there were 5 or 6 of us in this conversation instead of the 3 of us here so far, and we all removed our SIGs. Nobody would know who said what to whom without digging through the page diffs. Heiro 14:35, 30 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Ok, good to know. I won’t do it again. Epictrex (talk) 16:13, 30 March 2021 (UTC)Reply