Talk:Taíno archaeology

*:For comparison, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C21&q=Indigenous+Caribbean+archaeology&btnG= Indigenous Caribbean archaeology] yields 65,600 results on Google Scholar, while [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C21&q=Taino+archaeology&btnG= Taino archaeology] yields a mere 8,100 results. [[User:Bohemian Baltimore|Bohemian Baltimore]] ([[User talk:Bohemian Baltimore|talk]]) 01:10, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

*:For comparison, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C21&q=Indigenous+Caribbean+archaeology&btnG= Indigenous Caribbean archaeology] yields 65,600 results on Google Scholar, while [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C21&q=Taino+archaeology&btnG= Taino archaeology] yields a mere 8,100 results. [[User:Bohemian Baltimore|Bohemian Baltimore]] ([[User talk:Bohemian Baltimore|talk]]) 01:10, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

::: Hm. I think you misunderstood my question. I am not asking one title vs. the other title. I am asking umbrella vs. specialized. There's a lot of different separate articles under the "Indigenous archaeology in Caribbean" [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Indigenous_archaeology_of_the_Caribbean category]. This is just one of them. Is this going to be the umbrella article for ''all'' of them? Are you going to fold all of them into here? The alternative I have in mind is creating a ''new'' umbrella article, with the title you propose ("Indigenous archaeology of the Caribbean") for the general topic, and leaving this article as a specialized one on Taino archeology specifically. Under your proposal (as I understand it), [[Hacienda Grande culture]] gets to have a specialized article dedicated to it, but Taino archeology does not. So you're suggesting Taino archaeology is not sufficiently distinct or important to deserve a specialized article? [[User:Walrasiad|Walrasiad]] ([[User talk:Walrasiad|talk]]) 00:26, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

::: Hm. I think you misunderstood my question. I am not asking one title vs. the other title. I am asking umbrella vs. specialized. There's a lot of different separate articles under the "Indigenous archaeology in Caribbean" [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Indigenous_archaeology_of_the_Caribbean category]. This is just one of them. Is this going to be the umbrella article for ''all'' of them? Are you going to fold all of them into here? The alternative I have in mind is creating a ''new'' umbrella article, with the title you propose ("Indigenous archaeology of the Caribbean") for the general topic, and leaving this article as a specialized one on Taino archeology specifically. Under your proposal (as I understand it), [[Hacienda Grande culture]] gets to have a specialized article dedicated to it, but Taino archeology does not. So you're suggesting Taino archaeology is not sufficiently distinct or important to deserve a specialized article? [[User:Walrasiad|Walrasiad]] ([[User talk:Walrasiad|talk]]) 00:26, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

::::@[[User:Walrasiad|Walrasiad]] There's not a whole lot about "Taíno archaeology" specifically. A lot of information is already being folded under "Taíno archaeology", when that may not even be accurate. EG, non-Taíno archaeology in Hispaniola ([[Macorix]], [[Ciguayos]], etc.) or much older archaeological cultures that are generally referred to as non-Taíno. If an article like Hacienda Grande culture has limited reliable sources, then yes, that should be folded into a general article on Indigenous archaeology in the Caribbean as well. Scholars don't agree on who counts as "Taíno" (remember, the term was coined in the 1830s by [[Constantine Samuel Rafinesque]] and was not used by any tribes or by the Spanish) or who counts as "Arawak" ([[Daniel Garrison Brinton]]'s term). If we were to have a specifically "Taíno archaeology" article, we would have to be very specific about dates, locations, etc. Information that is in this article would have to be removed or rewritten. No, I don't think "Taíno archaeology" is sufficiently distinct enough to warrant its own article, whereas I think Indigenous Caribbean archaeology is distinct enough. ''The Oxford Handbook of Caribbean Archaeology'' treats the subject comprehensively. In ''[https://www.google.com/books/edition/An_Archaeological_History_of_Montserrat/f3zKDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=taino+archaeology+West+Indies&pg=PA62&printsec=frontcover An Archaeological History of Montserrat in the West Indies]'', the author addresses some of the terminological problems: "both historical and archaeological writings have sown confusion by their use of a welter of names...often in ways that are anachronistic, geographically incorrect, or that conflate linguistic and ethnic groupings." In this context, Indigenous is clear and comprehensive, whereas Taíno is not clear. [[User:Bohemian Baltimore|Bohemian Baltimore]] ([[User talk:Bohemian Baltimore|talk]]) 19:26, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

*'''Support'''. This makes the article far more useful and accurate since other cultures are getting subsumed into the "Taíno" umbrella, when that term might not always be the most accurate. [[User:Yuchitown|Yuchitown]] ([[User talk:Yuchitown|talk]]) 14:15, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

*'''Support'''. This makes the article far more useful and accurate since other cultures are getting subsumed into the "Taíno" umbrella, when that term might not always be the most accurate. [[User:Yuchitown|Yuchitown]] ([[User talk:Yuchitown|talk]]) 14:15, 18 April 2026 (UTC)