Talk:Tulum

Also the name of a Turkish musical instrument

"Tulum (bagpipe) is a Turkish folk instrument of the wind type. It consists of three parts with Deri Kısmı (leather section), Nav and Ağızlık (mouth piece). The air is stored in the leather section and is let into the nav section by pressing the bag under the arm. Nav is the part where the melody is played. It also has two parts called Analık and Dillik. Ağızlık is the section which sends the air to the leather bag of the pipe.

Tulum is used in Turkey at Trabzon, Rize, Erzurum, Kars, Northern and Eastern Anatolian regions and at the Thrace region. Tulum, which is generally made from lamb or kid skin, is called Gayda in Thrace" . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.96.42.178 (talk • contribs) 18 January 2006. (Note: It is also a quote taken directly from this website).

Thanks for noting an alternate use for the name "Tulum", anon contributor. I shall create a new article Tulum (instrument) for it (in original phrasing, of course), and note the disambiguation here.--cjllw | TALK 11:25, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

ok, Tulum (bagpipe) and Tulum (disambiguation) are now set up.--cjllw | TALK 06:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Town versus site?

Has there been thought in separating the entry for the town from the entry for the ruins. I've seen a number of internal links that are clearly meant to be for the municipality, that instead are directed here.

This might not have been a problem five years ago. I remember visiting in the late 90s and the town was miniscule. Went back in Dec 2006 and it's a good sized town and a destination of its own...

Perhaps "Tulum (Pueblo)" or "Tulum (town)" should be created, while this get's re-named "Tulum (ruins)" or "Tulum (historical site)"?

Would love to hear feedback on this. T L Miles 15:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

If there is enough information for a seperate article about the town, spinning one off seems fine to me. I'd leave the ruins at "Tulum" as it is more famous, and the town developed and got its name from the ruins. -- Infrogmation 17:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

on closer inspection there's already a stub called Tulum (city). When I get some time I'll try to flesh it out using what you have here for the city, and change the variety of links in wikipedia that are clearly aimed at the municipality to that (or else the disambiguation, which I updated).

Solidaridad, Quintana_Roo and Quintana Roo would be examples that are really meant for the municipality. T L Miles 20:07, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Separation of Tulum (precolumbian site) and Tulum Pueblo

I've undone the recently performed merge of material on the pre-Columbian site (from this Tulum article) into the article (Tulum, Quintana Roo) on the modern township.

These two are physically and historically distinct entities, and there's no need (indeed would be undesirable) to combine them into a single article. The two can of course cross-reference each other, but this article Tulum should be left to describe the pre-Columbian site, with Tulum, Quintana Roo describing the modern settlement, also known as 'Tulum Pueblo'. --cjllw ʘ TALK 04:07, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Hurricane warning system?

I added a blurb about the 'alter' next to the main temple, and how it is supposedly a hurricane warning system. I heard this on the tour. If it is true (which I really cannot prove), then I think this is important information. I do know that this has been reported in another Mayan site, as described in the link below: http://www.caribbeantravelweb.com/cozumel/activities.htm Look in the section under El Caracol Ruins, and it describes the light house and having a similar function. I don't think this source is reliable enough to reference, but it does lend some validity to the claim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neorunner (talk • contribs) 14:26, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

You're right, that travel website is not a sufficiently credible or reliable source, I would not rely upon it or any of the many similar generic tourism sites to validate any info about the pre-Columbian Maya. If a statement on such a website has any validity to it, then it must've appeared somewhere in the archaeological literature first; I can't find anything of this claim. At the very least we'd need some reference in the archaeological literature to bear any mentioning.

By the same token anything a tourguide may say, whether tall tale or no, cannot be used since by their nature these contravene WP:V policy. By rights we should not even record "according to some tour guide, ...".

The claim as described has low plausibility, a bit like the supposed hand claps at Chichen Itza sounding like quetzal bird-chirps as an intentional design feature of the architecture. This latter claim is likewise not generally supported by Mayanist scholars, tho' at least it has the merit of being proposed by an acoustics engineer.

The possibility remains that it's a real claim that's been published somewhere, but unless and until such a source is found, IMO there's no merit in mentioning it here on wiki. --cjllw ʘ TALK 23:32, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Arthur Miller

Are we sure this is the same Arthur Miller? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.16.150.219 (talk) 03:47, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

You're right, it's clearly not meant to link to the famous dramatist. Instead should be Arthur G. Miller, distinguished faculty prof. of art history & archaeology at Univ. of Maryland. We don't have an article on him as yet, tho'; after clearing up the links I might set up a stub for the archaeologist. Thx for the catch. --cjllw ʘ TALK 00:12, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Astrology and Architecture at Tulum

Is there any information available about a connection between astrology and architecture at Tulum? It seems like a possibility since the town is on a cliff and faces East/West.

98.222.198.11 (talk) 05:24, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

The diving god is Venus. The temple has many Venus glyphs. The Heliacal rising of Venus was extremely important to the Maya. The Dresden codex has a table of this. It's quite likely that the temple was used to observe this since its location high above the sea was ideal for observing it. This is original research so it can't be used in the article unless someone can find a reliable source. Senor Cuete (talk) 14:27, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

If anyone is able to do this you should go to the temple of the diving god on August 18, 2015 before sunrise and see if you can observe the heliacal rising of Venus over the sea in the glow of the rising sun. Senor Cuete (talk) 18:31, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Query in article

An IP user 203.134.34.199 posted the following in the article itself with regard to the "map of central Tulum" image. No idea if it's relevant/correct, but here it is anyway:

This image is not consistent with other plan drawings nor with visual inspections of the site-in particular the entrances depicted around the north and south watchtowers do not exist . The road around the west wall is not correct in that it goes around the north wall to an entrance in its middle. This plan should be replaced with a correct one .I have not yet worked out how to properly question images so forgive me for posting this here.I assume you will put it in its correct place.

Additionally - the map is incorrectly labeled. Where it reads "Temple of Fresnos" it should read instead "Temple of the Frescoes" (see Coe, The Maya, seventh edition. new york: thames & hudson, 2005, p. 198) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robespierre2120 (talk • contribs) 16:06, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 May 2016

please change the last line to "is home to Lexa Woods" Destroyingtheworlddotcom (talk) 18:21, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

 Not done, if you wish to have something added to the article, you must bring sources and assertion of notability. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 18:35, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

No commercial content allowed on Wikipedia

Please see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#Questionable_sources.

No "promotional in nature" on Wikipedia. If this was ok, then all of the hotel owners in the Riviera Maya could put links to and pictures of their hotels in articles like this and use Wikipedia as free advertising for their businesses. This is why there is a ban on commercial content in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Pictures of hotels aren't encyclopedic. Use some other venue for promoting your hotel. Senor Cuete (talk) 21:20, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

IDK why you think this is commercial or "promotional in nature" - there were simply too many images in the body of the article when I tried to read it yesterday, so I made a gallery, moved some of the images there and added one or two more to pad out the galley. I simply found this image by clicking the "good images" button top-right in c:Category:Tulum.

No image on Wikipedia Commons falls under WP:QUESTIONABLE - if you think it does, then you should be getting the image removed from Commons, not from here.

By the explanation you've given, there is lots of "commercial content" on wikipedia - of The Ritz Hotel, Gibson electric guitars, and Duracell batteries. It might be argued to remove this beach because it's not directly part of the historical ruins (I know nothing about this area, so just picked an image at random), but if you want to do that, find another picture to out in the gallery, don't just rudely delete it for the wrong reasons. Alternatively, just delete the whole gallery, but make sure you watch this page, and police it regularly, for when it gets filled up with dozens more images. Stroller (talk) 22:44, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

"You should learn how to use wikipedia before you people, mate." I don't understand what this sentence says. I've never heard of the word "people" used as a verb like this. An article about the Ritz or Gibson Guitars can have a picture of these but not an article about something else. You are now edit warring. Wikipedia expects you to defend your edit and ask for help from other editors before continuing. Senor Cuete (talk) 22:54, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm sure that your vacation pictures would be welcome on Facebook or some other social media site, but not Wikipedia. If you tool this picture, it would be questionable as WP:OR. After editors can't agree Wikipedia expects contributors to reach a consensus as to what might be in the article. This process is not, however, democratic (WP:NOTADEMOCRACY). Contributions must adhere to Wikipedia's principles. Senor Cuete (talk) 22:40, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

You should learn how to use wikipedia before you people, mate. The image was obviously not taken by me. You also need to give a valid reason for deleting it. not the one you have made so far. Stroller (talk) 22:46, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

I looked this hotel up. It's NOT in Tulum. It's way up the beach in Akumal. This article is about the ruins anyway. Senor Cuete (talk)

Ok, I'm removing c:Category:Beaches of Tulum from c:Category:Tulum, which is only for pictures of the ruins, I think. c:Category:Beaches of Tulum should only be under c:Category:Tulum, Quintana Roo, the county or region. Could you take a look in c:Category:Tulum and help clear it out of other stuff that shouldn't be in there, please? Stroller (talk) 23:16, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Almost all of images in the category c:Category:Beaches of Tulum are not pictures of the one small beach at the ruins, for example pictures of beaches on Cozumel island, Isla Mujeres, Cancun, etc. If all of these are in other categories of which this is a sub-category, maybe the whole category should go. As far as "I'm not familar with the area.", Central America is wonderful. The location of Tulum is great but other ruins like Tikal are bigger and more interesting. Since you called me "mate" I assume that you are an Aussie or a Kiwi. Australians travel a lot and at some point I recommend that you visit Central America. Senor Cuete (talk) 02:10, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

History and description; underwater archaeology

Greetings Wikipedians! Two issues with the four paragraphs about underwater archaeology:

• the language is identical to what I found in the Quintana Roo article, and has the same shortcomings. I fixed those issues in the Quintana Roo article today, and the same fixes would apply to the text that appears here.
• the language about underwater archaeology doesn't really belong here in the first place. This is about the ruins. The caves where human remains were found are apparently not part of the ruins, although they are in the general Tulum area.

My suggestion: remove the language from this Tulum ruins article, and add a "See Also" section with a link that points the reader to the Quintana Roo article. If nobody objects, I will make those changes after some time has passed for discussion. Cordially, BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 14:16, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

History section lacking

So what happened in Tulum between 1518 and 1843? Nosferattus (talk) 15:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Apparently Tulum was conquered by the Spanish in the mid-1500s and then the indigenous Maya were enslaved by the Spanish. There was also a lot of piracy going on. This section really needs to be expanded. Nosferattus (talk) 02:18, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

What cave?

“ In 2020, an underwater archaeological expedition led by Jerónimo Avilés again excavated the cave and revealed the skeleton of a female about 30 years of age that lived at least 9,900 years ago. “ This is the only mention of a cave. Can anyone provide context? Tjobrien.seoul (talk) 19:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)