Talk:Itzamna

message: This is a bad and badly phrased article. I frolicked around a bit, but I will soon make amends.77.162.130.139 02:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Frolicked around a bit"? You were vandalizing the article with nonsense.  Please refrain from making any more destructive edits.--Mr Fink 02:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Although I appreciate the figure for its curiosity value, I don't believe it is very appropriate to the discussion at hand. It is more about "Itzamna in North-American Culture" than about Itzamna among the Mayas. 77.162.130.139 (talk) 13:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, an authentic representation, such as from the Dresden Codex, would be much better. Will see about adding one in sometime in the future.--cjllw ʘ TALK 04:39, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Present Illustration 

message: I would like to see some much better sources to support the idea that the Maya young maize deity has a particularly strong association with phallic symbolism. Standard refs on the maize deity -Karl Taube, even JES Thompson- don't make much of a point of this. Possibly something's gone astray in the translation of the source given (a Romanian author seemingly better known for writing science fiction, and not someone I think who'd be the first place to check for reliable info on Maya mythology), and something else was intended...?
If nothing further forthcoming I'd propose removing this statement.--cjllw ʘ TALK 04:38, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, have now removed the statement. If it's to be readded, wld like to see some sources from the Mesoamericanist field. --cjllw ʘ TALK 04:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Young Maize god and phallic symbolism 

message: Is it possible that the Tonina picture should be turned? 77.162.130.139 (talk) 19:22, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Duly turned... Simon Burchell (talk) 21:27, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New illustration 

message: Unless there's been some recent re-evaluation I'm not aware of, the current picture taken from a looted polychrome vase has been identified by Michael D. Coe as God N, not Itzamna. 58.170.210.136 (talk) 12:14, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The book you are probably referring to, Lords of the Underworld, is from 1978; comparing gods D and N in Taube's Major Gods (1992) will convince you of the likelihood that the aged deity in the picture is god D, or Itzamna, rather than god N.Retal (talk) 12:52, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Current Illustration not Itzamna

message: I removed the otherwise interesting and funny picture by a U.S. artist, since this article being about the Mayas, it is not devoted to the concept U.S. citizens may have held of Itzamna.77.162.130.139 (talk) 16:13, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Good call.  Thanks, Madman (talk) 19:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irrelevant picture removed 

message: Where does it said that Itzamna & Ixchel are similar to Orpheus & Eurydice, Izanagi & Izanami, Savitri & Satyavan, and Lot & his wife? It doesn't said anything in Itzamna or Ixchel. Cococrash11 (talk) 06:46, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Itzamna and Ixchel