Talk:Chichen Itza

chultun of children rewritten

I deleted this section because, apparently unknowingly, the writer repeated the same information that appeared in the section that followed, which I believe I wrote (I didn't check). This version contains the claim that the skeletons found in the chultun of children had been sacrificed when the skeletons had no evidence of sacrifice, unlike remains recovered from the Cenote Sagrado, for example. I've copied the section here should the author wish to discuss it's restoration or perhaps merging it with section that already existed. "Bioarchaeological and Genetic Evidence "Recent bioarchaeological and archaeogenetic research has led to new insights into the ritual practices that occurred at Chichen Itza. In 2024, a genome-wide association study (GWAS) analyzed the bodily remains of 64 individuals who were discovered in a ceremonial context, a finding which was dated back to approximately 500–900 AD. All of the discovered individuals were determined to be male, as well as two sets of monozygotic twins. Comparing these individuals genetically, they were determined to be strongly related to current Maya populations. The majority of genetic variation between these individuals and modern Maya people was found at immunity-related genetic loci. Archaeologists interpret this discovery as potential evidence for the careful selection of certain individuals for ritualistic sacrifices, perhaps following a cultural pattern.

"Analyses of ossified skeletal remains and iconography also suggest that the ritualistic practice of disfiguring and displaying bodies may have been a part of public ceremonies. Analysis of skull racks and displays point to decapitated heads, for example, being displayed as sacred items. Given the importance of cosmological symbolism to the Maya people, these sacred skulls may have had ties to this. From their arrangement and spatial occurrence, researchers have inferred that ritualistic, sacred violence likely upheld and reinforced social hierarchies in many large Maya gathering centers. " CoyoteMan31 (talk) 18:29, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

References

cenote canoe

https://todayuknews.com/science/archaeology-rare-1100-year-old-maya-canoe-found-submerged-in-a-freshwater-pool-in-southern-mexico/ Significant enough to mention? 199.127.133.181 (talk) 16:42, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

While news articles claim the "canoe" was found near Chichen Itza, the cenote where it was discovered appears to be some distance away (closer to Ek Balam, for example). In my view, this info isn't relevant to Chichen. But it seems to me there should be somwehere on Wikepedia where it would be relevant. CoyoteMan31 (talk) 01:08, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 November 2021

In the "tourism" section: change " a handclap before the in front of the staircase the El Castillo pyramid " to "a handclap before the staircase of the El Castillo pyramid " 108.16.99.156 (talk) 23:02, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 09:14, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Revert explanation

I've reverted some edits related to recent news stories (livescience, one example of many) about DNA analysis of boys sacrificed in a "chultun" or pit chamber at Chichen Itza, as some well intentioned editors seem to have confused it with the Sacred Cenote, or incorrectly stated it was some other cenote, which it is not. Human sacrifice at Chichen Itza over the centuries seems to have taken different forms and in different places. -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:29, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

I'll move and rewrite this to better reflect the published articles written by the scientists involved. As my coding for sources usually is wrong, I'd appreciate if you'd take a look after I'm done. CoyoteMan31 (talk) 15:13, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: ARCN 101 The Human Story

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2026 and 16 March 2026. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Palmer914, Pointy Orthoceras (article contribs). Peer reviewers: ElectricButtercup, Jcoronadomcdermott.

— Assignment last updated by Sak201 (talk) 19:06, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Why is Chichén Itzá used in the article.

Doesnt match the titleDoug Weller talk 16:04, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Chichén Itzá is in fact the correct original Maya spelling in Spanish, with acute accents on both the "e" and "a." Palmer914 (talk) 20:11, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

But we should use the spelling in the title, it's the English common name, this is enwiki. Doug Weller talk 11:41, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Also, with those accents it is NOT the correct Maya spelling, it is specifically the Spanish transliteration of the Maya name. And the issues are already discussed in detail in the "Name and orthography" section near the top of the article. -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:52, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Presumably some editors with a shallow understanding thought it would be somehow "correct" to use the Spanish rather than the English or Maya rendering. Perhaps that should be reverted unless there is a specific counterargument? -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:55, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

"Chichen Itza" vs "Chichén Itzá" redux

Please do not do bulk "find and replace" edits in the whole article, as some sentences specifically address the variations, and changing without regard for context can turn text into nonsense. -- Infrogmation (talk) 15:57, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

• There are arguments for either rendering of the name, BUT as I see it: 1) An explanation should be put on the talk page, preferably with time for others to reply, before bulk changes. 2)The title of the article should agree with the term used in the article. 3) It should be understood that the Spanish language name is NOT the native Maya language name. 4) Clear explanations of different renderings should be included in the article. Further feedback welcome. -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:03, 12 March 2026 (UTC)