Talk:Tiwanaku

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2022 and 11 March 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Skennedy2 (article contribs).

Aliens?

This article says some of the stonework at the site suggests (without citation) "the existence of aliens" - I assume that's not really Wikipedia approved language? 64.92.51.254 (talk) 23:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I think the current version of the article is much less tinfoil-hat: "Due to the complexity of the stonework the site is often cited by conspiracy theorists to be a site of ancient alien intervention. These claims are entirely unsubstantiated." I think this comment is warranted, since most non-specialists (like me) first learned about Tiwanaku (Tihuanaco) through the long-running History Channel series "Ancient Aliens". This has been running some 30+ years including many reruns. As with other sites containing remarkable stonemasonry and stonecarving around the world, the show posits that, since there is no complete orthodox scientific or technical explanation for the precision and scale of the works, it had to be the case that alien superintelligences inspired the masons and engineers of the time to produce it. Most of the series is based on that same philosophical approach (or fallacy, if you like) of "explaining a mystery by a greater mystery." But it did lead me into researching the archaeological and technical theories of these and other ancient marvels, which I had never heard of in 70 years. The rivulets of science have very little defense against oceans of pseudoscience. 68.107.61.127 (talk) 22:06, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Open access paper about Bennett and Ponce Monoliths of Tiwanaku

Below is an interesting and detailed open access paper about Tiwanaku:

Criales, J.V., 2025. Drunken Mountains: Analysis of the Bennett and Ponce Monoliths of Tiwanaku (AD 500–1100) from a Multispecies Perspective. Latin American Antiquity, pp.1-21. Paul H. (talk) 00:05, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Major reference in text of article but not in bibliography

Here is a more complete cite of the work that is mentioned in the section of the article "Important Authors".

Protzen, Jean-Pierre, and Stella Nair. The Stones of Tiahuanaco : A Study of Architecture and Construction. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, University of California, Los Angeles, 2013.

Other works of his show up in the Bibliography but not this one. Germitage (talk) 22:14, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

“Important authors”

I don’t think this section is appropriate—the title so saying in wikivoice—especially being unsourced. (The authors themselves can’t be used for such a claim either; it should come from academic reviews or literature surveys.) Rather than remove the content outright, I’m minded to merge it into the Archaeology section, each paragraph in chronological order. Any objections, preference to delete it, or other ideas? —Odysseus1479 02:22, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes, but we also need sources. I don't recall a section like that in any other articles. Doug Weller talk 09:06, 18 December 2025 (UTC)