Talk:Tláloc

message: * The reference to Matlolcueitl was removed because 1) "She of the Jade Skirt" is the Chalchiuhtlicue and 2) I could find no reference to Matlolcueitl which wasn't itself a reference to this page. Corrections welcome. -- Dystopos 19:03, 28 November 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  her name is Matlalcueitl with an a instead of the o.·Maunus· tlahtōlli 19:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Matlolcueitl 

message: * The picture is REALLY FREAKY!
:* I think the original artwork depiction of Tlaloc is rather good, but that a PD Pre-Columbian depiction would be more appropriate. Other thoughts? -- Infrogmation 21:11, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *I agree that a Pre-Columbian depiction would be more appropriate.  I looked myself -- not extensively but I looked -- when this drawing was posted.  I couldn't find anything that was not copyrighted (understandably) and I couldn't even pull up a good "fair use" image.  Also, note that a JPG was pulled earlier this year for copyright problem.  Someone did add a link at the bottom, which helps somewhat.  In the end, my thoughts were that this drawing was better than no drawing.  -- Madman 00:40, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The picture 

message: * How can you possibly know if sacrifices were done to the rain god by the Teotihuacanos? Wasn't Teotihuacan occupied during classic period? -- Tlalocatecútli 14:41, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right, we know nothing of the content of teotihuacano ritual practice - it is also incorrect to say that depictions of tlaloc are found in teotihuacan since that implies that thy spoke nahuatl something that is not at all certain. They may have had a completely different name for their raingod.·Maunus· tlahtōlli 19:32, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teotihuacan 

message: * I have read that Tláloc is short for Tlalocatecútli - agglutination in Náhuatl of the stem words tlál(li) - earth, ócan - paradise and tecútli - lord. This literally means that Tláloc is the lord of Tlalócan, the wattery paradise beneath the earth. Is this correct? -- Tlalocatecútli 14:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * Where did you read this? The derivation seems quite likely, though the assumption that its literal meaning is also a religious meaning is suspect. If you can provide a citation, we can add the etymology and its reference to the article. --Dystopos 22:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: it is the reverse: Tlalocatectli is a longer version of tlalolc. Tlalocatecutli means "lord of tlalocan" - tlalocan means "place of tlaloc" - the meaning of the word tlaloc is not well understood but is often interpreted as "that which lies on the ground" ie. rain.·Maunus· tlahtōlli 19:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Derivation 

message: Since he was the MEXICAN rain god how could he have been worshiped in El Salvador? Do they speak Náhuatl down there? I don't think so but maybe some similar Uto-Aztecan language like Náhuat. All Meso-American cultures have a similar rain god like like Cocijo (Miztec), Tajin (Totonac) or Chac (Mayan). Is this really correct? -- Tlalocatecútli 21:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, Nahuatl-related languages were (and are still) spoken in areas of mid-Central America, and a number of peoples with cultures and traditions closely linked to those common to the central mexican plateaux were living in the Salvadoran region by at least Postclassic times; see for eg Pipil, whose language Nawat is indeed Uto-Aztecan. Classical Nahuatl was also quite a lingua franca of the region and traders, and considerable traffic and migration along the Pacific Guatemalan coast into the Salvadoran region from the Mexican uplands ensured a dynamic cultural exchange between these two separated areas.--cjllw | TALK 00:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Tlaloc in El Savador?" 

message: For those of you who can't seem to find the reference to "Nahualpilli" being one of Tlaloc's names, please see Book II "The Ceremonies" of Sahagun's Florentine Codex, specifically "Tlalloc. icujc" (The Song of Tlaloc). Also, see Sullivan's _Scattering of Jades_. Likewise, Oliver's _Mockeries and Metamorphoses_, while primarly about Tezcatlipoca, also discusses this name in relation to Tlaloc. In fact, I've yet to see a Mesoamerican scholar discount Nahualpilli as one of Tlaloc's titles. Honestly, this is very basic scholarship, and this issue should've been resolved a long time ago. If such a word can never exist in classic Nahuatl, then why did Thelma Sullivan ever bother? She was only one of the greatest Nahuatl linguists that ever lived. If the Florentine is suddenly considered "specialized" sourcing, then I'm afraid that most of the Mesoamerican articles on Wikipedia need to be highly edited. I'd also like to know why a primary source can't be referenced in the article, since Taube's book, full of all the mistakes that it is (and it is, indeed, full of mistakes and pet theories on his part), is freely used as a source.
I'd furthermore like to ask why this article mentions nothing in depth of Tlaloc's cave/mountain associations, lightning associations, appearances in mythology (with citation), astronomical associations (as per the Borgia, etc), his pre-Aztec history or his ties with warfare. And how about a real iconography discussion? Really, this article is of exceptionally low quality at the moment, and requires much improvement. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.237.103.215 (talk) 01:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am discounting the name nuhualpill hat someone keeps reinserting, with a reference to an obscure website. Nahualpilli is a different story and if you quote a page number of the florentine codex that will do fine as a reference, Thelma Sullivan will do even better - but no one has presented such sources up untill now. And yes the article is of low quality - please go ahead and do something about it.·Maunus· ·ƛ· 07:21, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the name Nahualpilli... 

message: Found this fascinating item while doing research on Cantinflas in a periodicals database:
Tlaloc received one write-in vote in the Mexican presidential election of July 5, 1964, coming in behind Cantinflas, who received two.(Associated Press. "Write-In votes" (news brief), The Dallas Morning News, July 24, 1964, section 1, page 5. Wording is mine.)
Incidentally, the AP news brief cited refers to him as "Tlaloc, the centuries-old Aztec stone god recently moved to Mexico City ... ." I mention that because that suggests there might be relevant articles in newspaper databases AND because the moving of the statue suggests one reason why he'd have been sufficiently at the forefront of voters' minds to get any votes at all. Lawikitejana 06:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Don't know if there's any good place for this tidbit 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Tlaloc. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.conaculta.gob.mx/saladeprensa/2002/25mar/centro.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:12, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There are at least 10 mentions of Tlaloc in The Illuminatus Trilogy.  This notation was apparently undone by user:Doug Weller as "unsourced" and "not significant".  Leaving aside its significance for the moment, what would constituted proper sourcing for this type of notation?  I have a PDF of the book and a search for the word generates 10 hits (I could quote one or more passages and refer to page numbers in a printed edition). Would that be sufficient sourcing? Hazratio (talk) 19:10, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: that's explicitly forbidden, see WP:NOR. Also see Wikipedia:"In popular culture" content. Doug Weller talk 19:52, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Simply because something is mentioned in a book or franchise does not necessarily demonstrate its significance in popular culture, especially when you don't explain how the subject's importance to the book/franchise is, especially if it's not regarded as being relevant enough to mention in depth at the parent page, or how the subject's role in the book/franchise affects popular culture's view of the subject.--Mr Fink (talk) 20:05, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

text: Or, shorter: "If the topic isn't mentioned or discussed in the parent page, it's not notable to be mentioned in its own page."--Mr Fink (talk) 20:59, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Illuminatus Trilogy 

message: I think this article needs an overview of proper objective voice and sources 67.0.210.224 (talk) 08:39, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  language