This template is within the scope of WikiProject South America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to South America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject South AmericaTemplate:WikiProject South AmericaSouth America articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject North AmericaNorth America articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indigenous peoples of the Americas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of the AmericasWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasIndigenous peoples of the Americas articles
Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I think this is a generally sound concept for a high-level navbox. I realise it's probably still 'in work', but would just like to clarify what articles it is reasonable to have listed on this template. For eg, I was bold and removed Solutrean hypothesis, as that is but one specific example of a competing "how the New World was peopled" idea that's been put forward. As it is yet to find substantive and general support, intriguing though the idea may be, it seemed to be giving it undue prominence by listing it here (particularly in the absence of a listing of the much more 'standard' Bering Strait migration model). IMO it's prob not necessary to have the individual theories' articles listed here, only the one or two which give the overview of them all (or most of 'em, anyways).
Also, not sure about listing a selection of the (more 'famous') pre-Columbian cultures, such as Maya, Inca, etc. I suppose it depends on how this navbox template was envisaged, but my presumption is that it would only be necessary to have only the topmost pan-continental and major regional articles (and/or their "history of.." article equivalents, if they have them) mentioned. Thoughts?--cjllwʘTALK03:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
I'm looking for a wide, interdisciplinary scope at the top-level,[1] but allowing for narrow views at the secondary level - accessible from the template. Please modify it at your convenience. —Viriditas | Talk12:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I put Mesoamerica back in to the history segment. I think the objection raised was more than a little spurious, but in an attempt to address anyway have amended the link so that it ends up at Mesoamerican chronology, which ATM serves just the same purpose as any other "History of.." style article. Maybe one day we could rework things so there is both a chronology and history of article for mesoamerica, instead of one covering both presentation styles. But for now it will have to do, omitting Mesoamerica from this template would be a complete mistake given its significance and recognition. --cjllwʘTALK01:51, 10 September 2008 (UTC)Reply