Talk:Tlaltecuhtli

message: The article identifies the Tlaltecuhtli as a "goddess".  Actually Tlaltecuhtli is an earth GOD. The name is an agglutination of the two Nahuatl words "Tlal" - earth and "Tecuhtli" - lord. Only males are lords. According to Alfonso Caso* There were four earth gods - Tlaltecuhti who was male and three earth goddesses - Coatlique,  Cihuacoatl and Tlazolteotl.  "ique" means lady, "cihua" is woman so these are female names. "Teotl" means god so this could be either gender.
*Caso, Alphonso (fifth printing 1978) The Aztecs: People of the Sun Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. ISBN0-8061-0414-7 pp. 52-56 OCLC 58-11603
If nobody argues about this, I'll change it and add the citation. Senor Cuete (talk) 18:38, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody argued about this edit for two years so I corrected the article.  Senor Cuete (talk) 19:24, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  NOT a goddess 

message: It looks to me like the IPA pronunciation has the emphasis on the wrong syllable. In Nahuatl the emphasis is invariably on the second-to-the-last syllable. In this case the "cuh". I.E. tlalteCUHtli. Senor Cuete (talk) 18:32, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: Miller and Taube are art historians - NOT anthropologists. Their books are NOT reliable sources. They're full of nonsense that is contrary to mainstream scholarship including their own interpretations of iconography, careless or lack or research and speculation. Wikipedia prefers secondary sources. Since these two don't use any footnotes it's impossible to find the primary sources that they might have used to reach these conclusions. Adding their opinions to the article added many un-referenced statements like the mis-statement of the god's name in Nahuatl, the complete crap that the god in the center of the Stone of the Fifth Sun isn't Tonatiuh and the statement that "scholars" think that the god had two genders. I know you did this as an assignment in school. I wish that professors wouldn't assign editing Wikipedia to their students, rather it would be better for Wikipedia if experts in the field would edit the articles - citing RELIABLE sources. It's a shame that there is so much crap written about Aztec mythology. It makes it really hard to maintain a good article. Rather than tag the article with numerous 'citationneeded's I reverted all of your rewrite of the article and ask you to discuss it here. Do yourself a big favor and look for reliable sources. Senor Cuete (talk) 22:06, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Also read the above section "NOT a goddess". Senor Cuete (talk) 22:09, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Their interpretations ARE nonsense and contrary to mainstream scholarship. Just making something up like the god in the stone of the fifth sun is Tlatlecuhtli and then publishing it as fact is WP:FRINGE. It's not a secondary source. Also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources. Miller and Taube isn't a secondary source. "Many scholars have speculated that the deity is either female or dual-gendered..." "Many scholars" is weasel words. "Speculated...". Speculation is not encyclopedic. The paragraph about the fact that the god is really masculine was fair and balanced and reflected the fact that Miller and Taube is crap. You looked at codices and decided that the god is feminine? This is original research - not allowed on Wikipedia. Also you added un-referenced text saying that "her name means 'The one who gives and devours life.'" This is crap. His name is an agglutination of the Nahuatl words "tlal(li)(earth) and tecuhtli(lord - masculine) - literally "earth lord". Caso at least gets his information from the codices. I could go on and on but the point is that you should look for reliable sources. Senor Cuete (talk) 14:30, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

text: NO - Miller and Taube DIDN"T get this idea from the codices. In their bibliography they list the Florentine Codex as their source for information about the Aztec dieties. This god is not mentioned in this codex so they DID get this idea by interpreting the iconography. Senor Cuete (talk) 19:02, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

text: In their bibliography, Miller and Taube also list the Codex Borbonicus and the Histoyre du Méchique (which they quote in their passage on Tlaltecuhtli), both 16th-century primary sources which explicitly discuss Tlaltecuhtli. At your prompting, I also looked at other secondary sources that discuss the deity's gender — Leonardo Lopez Lujan's Tlaltecuhtli, published following the discovery of the monolith in Mexico City, and Lucia Henderson's dissertation on the multi-faced aspect of the deity. From these sources, I have pulled more of the scholarship regarding the gender debate. You're right — Wikipedia is at its best when written by the experts. Clearly people feel strongly about this aspect of Tlaltecuhtli, and the multiple representations speak to the deity's importance in the pantheon. I also added several images to the article, one of which depicts Tlaltecuhtli in male garb, and one in female. I have also cited primary or secondary sources on every point presented. If you have further issues with my edits, I would be happy to give you my email address or Mary E. Miller's so we can discuss the topic further. Clara 20:50, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You cite the Florentine Codex but with no volume or page number. The English translations are in  12 volumes. I have the first book, the gods, and this god is not in it. Where do you see this god in Sahagun? Maybe it's in Book 3: The Origin of the Gods? Your library should have this. Senor Cuete (talk) 14:15, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

text: My citation of Tlaltecuhtli appears in Book 6 (Rhetoric and Moral Philosophy), Chapter 3 in a description of the prayers offered to Tezcatlipoca when war was waged. Sahagún describes Tlaltecuhtli's connection to the sun, and demand for blood offerings. Clara 02:24, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Then you should add a volume and page number to your citation. Also if you can't add a page, etc. to the Histoire de Mechique then your citation is invalid. Unfortunately there isn't an English translation of this reference. You apparently have access to the library of a major university. Maybe it's there. Can you speak French? Senor Cuete (talk) 13:05, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

text: My citation does include the Florentine Codex volume number and page (Book 6, page 13). The full text of the Histoyre du Mechique is available online in JSTOR or at persee.fr, but unfortunately I don't think it has been edited or translated into English. I accessed the source in French and referenced Chapter IX, La créacion du monde (The creation of the world), which begins on page 34 of this version of the manuscript. I've updated my citations to reflect this. Clara 16:24, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miller and Taube 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:08, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: 2nd paragraph, it says according to a sorce, ....... Could you name the source? 73.20.50.209 (talk) 22:34, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sorce?