Talk:Diablada

New beginning

Hello guys as you may know we have been having a debate, mainly between Marshal and me, about this article. After several months we are in a good track and we could agree on many things, the present article integrates what we have been discussing and adds more information. It's not flawless, and I know it can be improved further but I think that by now it can be loaded and start working together in its improvement, Marshal also agrees with it. So I hope that in the future we can talk things through making positive suggestions for the benefit of the article. Below I'll copy the content of our agreements in the page User talk:Tbsdy lives/Erebedhel and MarshalN20 so everybody can have a reference of what we have been talking so far.Erebedhel - Talk 21:16, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Paragraph 1 - Location

Main point of debate: What countries should be mentioned in the lead?

MarshalN20 considers that Ecuador and Argentina should be added to the list providing the following link:

Miss Perú rechaza la invitación de Evo Morales para bailar ‘La Diablada’

The Ministry of Cultures of Bolivia clarified that 'the Diablada' is one of the most important icons of the Canival of Oruro, declared as Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity by the UNESCO in 2001. Meanwhile, Peruvian analysts say that 'the Diablada' is for centuries a cultural manifestation shared y Peru and Bolivia in the altiplanic zone in the border and that it can be even observed also in the north of Argentina and even in Ecuador.

It's visible in the text that those who say that it's danced in those other countries are the "Peruvian analysts" so adding that phrase without attribution wouldn't be neutral either. (On a side note, I should point out that mr. Ernesto Justiniano is a blogger, a very dedicated and organized one but a blogger who copy news in his blog from other websites).

Regarding the Diablada pillareña I'm afraid that among the sources MarshalN20 compiled other than being an homonym there isn't a established link between that particular dance and the topic of this article, establishing that link within the article would constitute original synthesis.

Moreover, what should be the criterion of inclusion to the list of countries where it's danced? One thing is which countries really dispute the origin of the dance and the countries where the dance was imported. For example the Diablada is performed since 2003 in Austria and for over 11 years in USA. Erebedhel - Talk 21:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The Diablada pillareña is a Diablada (It's in the name itself!). You are stating that I'm creating links when the information I have provided (and which can also be found in my sandbox [1]) clearly explains that the Diablada pillareña was also created by the mixture between the Spanish and Native American culture; there is even a government declaration (From Ecuador) that presents its two most established theories: One which is that the dance and celebration is influenced by other neighboring nations with the coming of their immigrants during colonial times, and the other which is that the dance developed as a sort of courtship ritual and community rivalry in later centuries. Either way, the dance is a Diablada. Do you have a source which states otherwise?--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 22:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Well that's original research. on the other hand. The burden of getting sources relies in the one who wants to make a claim in your case you want to say that the Diablada Pillareña is related to the Diablada of Oruro-Puno-Tirana if you want to introduce that text you have the responsibility to search for sources that say "The Diablada Pillareña is related to the Diablada of Oruro-Puno-Tirana" is not my responsibility to search the sources for you.Erebedhel - Talk 22:54, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

No. My claim is that the Diablada pillareña is a Diablada. Whether it is actually "related" to the Diabladas in the Altiplano is not the purpose. I have already provided evidence that there exists a Diablada in Ecuador, and that the dance is a Diablada (based on the mixture between Native American and Spanish culture and religion).--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 23:00, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

My observation is related to the logistic of it, there isn't any information regarding a "General Diablada", if in the lead we introduce the text "it's danced in Ecuador where it's known as Diablada pillareña" we'd be already establishing that link ourselves and relating it de facto without further evidence. I think that the article should be only about the Andean Diablada which is the topic of this article so far, and offer a disambiguation page, after all the Diablada pillareña has already its own article. Erebedhel - Talk 01:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

We are not creating links. The title of the article is "Diablada." In Ecuador the dance is called "Diablada pillareña." Pillaro is a city in the Andes. This article further serves as evidence that Pillaro's Diablada is also a mixture between Christianity and native culture: [2]. However, Ecuador does not claim sole ownership of the "Diablada" dance (unlike Bolivia), and the articles I have presented also do not make a specific claim of origin to the Diablada dance (which means the claim that the Diablada was created in the Altiplano is not challenged). These Diablada pillareña articles only present the approximate date in which the Diablada pillareña is created; and this article from Ecuador's government is the one that establishes a connection between Ecuador's Diablada and the dances of neighboring Andean communities: [3]. Deleting such information because it simply does not agree with your personal definition of a Diablada is completely incorrect.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 01:48, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes we are, you're not understanding my point the Diablada pillareña is a homonym unless there is a study establishing a link. That's why there are disambiguation pages putting it would represent to change the topic completely and stablish links that doesn't exist. The link you provided doesn't say such a thing actually it says:

That the actors or characters that intervene are: DEVILS with a large number of participants, dance around the LINE COUPLES which, represent the patrons, dance to the rhythm of the music un couples and classic steps guarded by the devils; the GUARACHAS, men disguised as women, of the brighten and "offered" in their presentation travels the squad dancing with great rejoicing, drops a doll simbolizing their son and presents him to all the spectators toasting with liquor that carries in their caminera (bag), the CAPARICHES, initiate a parade, opening the path and dancing qith a broom elaborated of flowers, nettle and wild plants; THE BAND is impressing in the party, the actors dance following rhythms of Sanjuanitos, tones, passacaglia and saltashpas, THE CABECILLA is the organizer and responsible f the good presentation of each one of the matches

Other than the devils, in the Diablada#Choreography which is the topic in the article, there are no line couples, guarachas, capariches, sanjuanitos, saltashpas, cabecillas or even a broom. It's a completely different dance. Erebedhel - Talk 02:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

That Choreography section is completely unreferenced and was put there by me as a translation from the one in the Spanish wiki. I am assuming that such is the choreography of the dance because I have never seen a Diablada. The Diablada puneña is not the same as the Diablada of Oruro, and these are also not the same as the Diablada pillareña (There are sources certifying this). These are all different dances. Hence why it is completely incorrect to attribute the dance as the specific ownership of one country.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 02:44, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps it'd be clearer when we reach that part, but for example Cuentas Ormachea does describe it, and identifies differences but still relates them. Besides the main characters Devil, China Supay, And Archangel Saint Michael are in both styles while the Pillareña doesn't have any of those. Erebedhel - Talk 02:57, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I understand that the Diabladas in the altiplano seem to have influenced each other (The Diablada Chilena is an off-shoot from the Diablada of Oruro, though I think there is a source explaining that it also has some influence from Peruvian dancers...not really too sure on that), but they are still different dances. The Diablada in Pillaro has apparently developed on its own despite the article from the government of Ecuador explains that one theory revolving its creation is that it was brought by immigrants from neighboring Andean countries. However, the dance is still a Diablada. It holds the same kind of roots as the other Diabladas: Spanish culture mixing with Native American culture. The dance is called Diablada, the dancers are dressed as devils and also hold parades and presentations. Perhaps the best way to approach this is by creating different sections for the different choreographies; not determining which Diablada is the official Diablada (because there is no such thing as an "official" Diablada; Peru, Ecuador, and Bolivia have all claimed their dances are cultural patrimonies of their nations).--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 03:11, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I was going to suggest later when we get to the body of the article to focus on the regional variations in the stylistic characteristics and move the material regarding its history to that section. However perhaps we could add the text "There is a style of dance proper of Ecuador named Diablada pillareña" somewhere apart to make it clear that is different from the Andean one. Erebedhel - Talk 03:55, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that is a good idea. However, the question still revolves as to how different the dance truly is. We have to remain in the boundaries of the source because, as you have stated before, we should not create links or by that matter come up with any conclusions. Pillaro is in the Andes, and its Diablada is also an Andean Diablada. It has two theories on its origin: One (which is arguably the most important and closest in relation to the Diablada in the altiplano) which states that the dance is first created by immigrant communities of neighboring Andean nations during colonial times, and the other which attributes the dance as having roots in some local conflicts/rivalries. Essentially, one theory is that it developed independently and the other that it developed as a result of immigrants from other nations (such as Colombia, Peru, and Bolivia; these are Ecuador's closest "Andean neighbors"). I really would not know how to include it into the introduction; how about we add it in the fourth paragraph of the introduction (Where it is described that the Diablada has different variations)? Perhaps we should just postpone this question of the Diablada pillareña until later? Also, so then do you agree that mentioning Ecuador is OK? (That would establish Ecuador as OK, but would still leave the question over Argentina).--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 04:40, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes I think that we should add that text to the end of the lead, then really see if there is more information right now I think we lack of information to conclude anything and postpone the topic of Diablada pillareña for later. Regarding Argentina I believe it was introduced by the Bolivian communities there in the 90s [4] I don't know it'd have the same treatment as Austria and the US. Perhaps instead of putting it in the same body later in the lead it could say "There is a style of dance proper of Ecuador named Diablada pillareña and squads of Diablada were founded in other countries such as Argentina, United States and Austria" I believe that in Sweden and Japan too, the last one I think its named "Diablada Rising Sun". Erebedhel - Talk 04:57, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I like your plan. If the Diablada has been danced in the US for a long time, I think you stated 11 years, then it should be worth mentioning. The one in Austria seems to be notable as well. Perhaps it could be a section called "Diablada outside South America" or something like that. Nonetheless, the question here is whether the Diablada is an important part of the cultural festivities of the nations. The Diablada pillareña has been performed since colonial times in Ecuador (and is done every single year); I think that by nature the Diablada is an important part of the festivities of Ecuador. Would you agree with this?--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 05:44, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The Diablada pillareña is undoubtedly important for Ecuador, sadly it lacks of information. Let's leave that text till we get there or find more information. Erebedhel - Talk 06:09, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I have 3 or more sources on the matter. I do not have as many or as strong sources for Argentina. Could we please have a compromise here? Let Ecuador be mentioned as having its Diablada being an important part of its cultural heritage in the introduction (because it is well-supported), and drop Argentina (because it is not well-supported)?--MarshalN20 | ^Talk

Yeah, I think we both agree on this, Ecuador's Diablada gets in the lead, we'll see the rest eventually. Meanwhile I think Tbsdy will have a lot of reading to do, let's see what he has to say about our progress so far. Erebedhel - Talk 00:12, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Good. Yes, let's let Tbsdy get caught up on the matter; and also let's wait for his decision on the first subject in which we cannot find a common solution.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 02:25, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Paragraph 1 - Timing

Main point of debate: Is it accurate to say it's only during the 16th century?

MarshalN20 exposed that 1538 and 1576 are in the 16th century, which is correct, and the mention to 1818 didn't mention specifically that it was the date suggested by Max Harris, however I believe he didn't read the whole text in the paragraph The Sins of the Carnival Virgin and I wouldn't blame him because it's 20 pages long from page 205 to page 225 but in resume Max Harris says that the Rebellion of Túpac Amaru II in 1781 represented a big event in the city of Oruro and it was the event that marked Oruro's carnival because the rebellion occurred during those days, Harris suggests that a generation later the parish priest Ladislao Montealegre tried to represent this event and wrote a play named "Narrative of the Seven Deadly Sins" which according to him and Fortún would be inspired in the Ball de Diables and then later he explains how it adapted into the modern Diablada. This theory is also present in other studies [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Besides another theory suggested in this book says that it was during the 18th century in Potosí. Erebedhel - Talk 21:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The first paragraph you present constantly speaks of the creation of the "Relato de la Diablada" (English: Tale of the Diablada). There is obviously a difference between the creation of a tale and the creation of a dance. However, your second one-sentence paragraph does provide the exact mention of the dance and it does bring about the view of its creation in the 18th century in Potosi (It also mentions that the dance was brought to Oruro in the 19th century). Therefore, based on that, it is not accurate to attribute the creation of the dance to the 16th century. However, it should be noted this source once again makes mention of the Autos Sacramentales theory.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 22:55, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The dance enacts a play about the struggle of good and evil... it's danced but it also has a story, is like Grease (musical). But yes there are several theories and many books say different things, so picking only one would be inaccurate, that's my central point. Erebedhel - Talk 23:05, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you should let Tbsdy decide whether these issues are resolved or not?--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 00:58, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I thought you agreed but if you have anything else to add it's ok. Erebedhel - Talk 01:04, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the central point of this discussion based on the last source you provided. However, I do not agree with your final statement regarding "there are several [...]" because this subject has a wide coverage of topics and I do not know which one you are refering to. Instead marking this as resolved, you should first re-state the central focus of your question and ask whether the central issue is resolved or not. Tbsdy then from that response should mark this as resolved or not (since he is the arbitrator). I would not be picky about this in a regular discussion, but based on how things have developed in this matter (Particularly the ease with which statements are misunderstood) it is best to keep things at the most formal and strict of ways.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 01:16, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The Main issue on this section was as said above "Is it accurate to say it's only during the 16th century?" you said "Therefore, based on that, it is not accurate to attribute the creation of the dance to the 16th century." my comment saying that there are several theories is regarding the whole topic of the Diablada, origins, cultural heritage, symbolism, and also dates, I think we solved the issue on dates we should focus on the rest. Erebedhel - Talk 01:33, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Good. Then the central issue is resolved. 2 issues resolved thus far.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 04:48, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Paragraph 1 – Lupakas or Anchanchu

Main point of debate: Should the lead mention Lupakas or Dance of the Anchanchu?

I noticed that MarshalN20 reintroduced a part regarding the name Dance del Anchanchu (now wikilinked) that I previously changed to Lupakas. We didn't mention our reasons for that change but I consider it fair to explain it further, MarshalN20's information is based on the following article:

Diablos Danzantes en Puno, Perú

The mask maker Edwin Loza Huarachi, Punean mask maker who had been dancer of the Diablada during more than twenty years, in which he has danced like angel and as devil, proposes go further in this generalized supposition which treats the Diablada as an Auto Sacramental of the Catholic Church , which represents the struggle between good and the evil, and in which the one who decides the victory of the archangels is the protector virgin of the miners, mother of the Candlemas. In its place, he raises as requirement to understand the meaning of the dance the necessity of submerge oneself in the cosmos understanding of the Aymara men, to find there some of the responses beyond the apparent. Is this way he prefers to name ''Dance of the Anchanchu" to what today is known as Diablada Puneña

First of all Edwin Loza Huarachi himself says that Diablada puneña = Dance of the Anchanchu so it wouldn't need a different article. But overall I really don't think that mr Loza Huarachi suggestion would constitute a really relevant reason to change Lupakas which also are in the literature that defend the theory of Juli [12] [13]. Erebedhel - Talk 21:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Huarachi is not the only person that makes reference to the ritual dance to "Anchanchu" (or "Anchancho," also called "Tio"). Dr. Omar Aramayo, a historian, also makes note of it: [14].--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 23:20, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I think we're discussing two different things here, Anchanchu ≠ Dance of the Anchanchu. In the Aymaran mythology there exists this figure:

A terrible demon in the folklore of the Aymara people (Bolivia and Peru). He deceives the unwary with his smiles and friendly appearance, then afflicts them with deadly diseases. It is also said that the Anchanchu sucks the blood of his victims during their sleep. His presence is accompanied by whirlwinds. The Aymara avoid rivers and isolated places where the demon is supposed to reside.

— Encyclopaedia Mythica

And the Punean variation has this character I wrote it in my workshop:

the Punean variation of the dance contains two new characters, the golden Anchanch (Aymara: Q'ori Anchanchu) and the silver Anchanchu (Aymara: Q'olqe Anchanchu). These characters wear a full golden or silvered mask.

However, there is no such thing as an ancient "Dance of the Anchanchu" it's just Huarachi's suggestion of name change. Besides what's the problem with the Lupakas? that's the main issue I really don't see anything wrong with that. Erebedhel - Talk 01:02, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

So then would you agree on the following sentence (Based on the three sources provided in this section): "The dance is a mixture of the Spaniard's theatrical presentations and Andean rituals such as the llama llama dance in honor of the Uru god Tiw and the Aymaran miner's ritual to Anchanchu, a terrible demon spirit of caves and other isolated places."--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 02:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Agree Erebedhel - Talk 02:42, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

One last question, is "Tiw" the same character as "Tio"? If that is the case, Dr. Aramayo states that "Anchanchu" is also the same character as Tio.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 02:47, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, well the Tiw from the Uru culture was hispanized as Tío → then derived in the myth of the perfectible devil page 3 the thing is the timing eventually accross the Andes the Anchanchu and the Tiw with the Spanish ended up being the same thing the Tío and the Devil, but at the moment of the introduction the Anchanchu was Aymara and the Tiw was Uru also Wari. Erebedhel - Talk 03:18, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Still, I find it unfair that "Anchanchu" gets explained but "Tiw" is left without an explanation. We should explain that these are both the same kind of deities (or at least similar, like Jupiter (mythology) and Zeus). How about this for a sentence? : "The dance is a mixture of the Spaniard's theatrical presentations and Andean religious ceremonies such as the llama llama dance in honor of the Uru god Tiw and the Aymaran miner's ritual to Anchanchu, both folkloric deities being terrible demon spirits of caves and other isolated places." (NOTE: I switched "Andean rituals" to "Andean religious ceremonies" in order to avoid the repetition of "ritual").--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 03:37, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The tricky part is that for the Uru mythology the Tiw is a protector while in Aymara mythology is a demon, in the link above said "The Tiw protector of the Urus in mines, lakes and rivers. In the case of Oruro or Hururu, is owner of the caves and rocky shelters."perhaps we should change the text to: "The dance is a mixture of the Spaniard's theatrical presentations and Andean religious ceremonies such as the llama llama dance in honor of the Uru god Tiw their protector in mines, lakes and rivers, and the Aymaran miner's ritual to Anchanchu, a terrible demon spirits of caves and other isolated places." or something like that. Erebedhel - Talk 04:02, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I like that idea. I've also created/fixed the articles in order to fit both deities. The Tiw one needs some sourcing, though (so that it won't get deleted). The sentence is a bit of a run-on, though. Perhaps it might be best to use parenthesis at this point: "The dance is a mixture of the Spaniard's theatrical presentations and Andean religious ceremonies such as the llama llama dance in honor of the Uru god Tiw (their protector in mines, lakes, and rivers), and the Aymaran miner's ritual to Anchanchu (a terrible demon spirit of caves and other isolated places)." Of course, then it would need the appropiate sourcing and etc. Do you agree with this sentence or do you think it can be further improved?--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 04:15, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I think it's ok, perhaps we could also use —text like that— too. I have sources for the Tiw and images once we finished I'll work on it, oh and good you fixed the redirect I suppose that the people at Týr wouldn't mind. Erebedhel - Talk 04:34, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

They probably will. You just reminded me of a similar situation I had with another article. I'll fix that in order to avoid any problems with the Tyr people. Yes, using the dashes is good too; it's mainly a matter of style (it's fine either way with me, though I think using "()" tends to be more common). Perhaps you could provide those pictures of Tiw to the Diablada article as well (in the "Native American Roots" section or something of the like)?--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 04:45, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh good fix that one and also we have to correct the links here to avoid ruining those other articles, and sure I found really nice images to add to the article when we advance I'll be adding them. Erebedhel - Talk 05:04, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Article's looking great!

Good job on the article. It's looking great thus far. There are still some minor things that I would like to debate, but in the overall it's great.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 00:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, yeah there are things that need to be improved it's very lengthy and there are things I must have overlooked, we'll be perfecting it by time, but meanwhile I notified Tbsdy so he can give it a check first, let's see what he says. But I think it'll end up great too. Erebedhel - Talk 00:34, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I just did some alphabetizing, deleted a statement that didn't have references, and included some referenced material. That's about it for me right now. I may make more edits in the future, but that's unlikely. The article is overall of good quality. The new pictures are great, especially that historical mask from the Bolivian war of independence. It's a great job overall.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 01:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah I noticed that, it looks better and thank you for improving the part of the Autos sacramentales, just a couple of things:

• this is not a big thing but I just wrote Bolivian war of independence because the celebration changed only in Bolivia while In Peru is still celebrated on February 2nd.
• and here I'll do a minor edit with the citation format you know, <ref name="Garcilaso"/>, because that same source is already used below and change "explains" for "says" or "considers" according to WP:WORDS.

Besides that everything is ok, I'm glad that you liked the new pictures, I'll be working in correcting grammar, creating the articles for the red links left in the article and translating the article to other languages but I think that from now on the article will be much more stable and most people will be satisfied with it. Erebedhel - Talk 01:32, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

"DANZA DE DIABLOS" and "DIABLADA" are two diferent adjetivs.

"DANZA DE DIABLOS" is generic, and is a "generic dance" with various forms like contries are:

"diablicos" = devil dance from venezuela "gran diablo" = devil dance from panama "diablada" = devil dance from Bolivia etc.

So... "diablada" = is a one from various "DANZAS DE DIABLOS" (from Oruro - Bolivia)....

TANKS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.129.19.244 (talk) 21:06, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Modern book sources do not agree with your personal beliefs. Update yourself. Thanks.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 01:19, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

subjectivism

This article contains several subjectivism, they began to edit properly, please involve stakeholders. Greetings --Nair (talk) 16:00, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Just a Note

This article passed through lenghty POV conflicts and was in formal mediation, another episode of such behaviour could lead to permanent block. Please let's avoid further conflict. 200.87.23.193 (talk) 14:57, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Please stop deleting sources. Vandalizing the article is not appropiate. Best regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 15:05, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Your continued vandalism is unacceptable. Please read WP:PILLARS. Best regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 15:21, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

You're re-engaging a POV edit war, in the introduction itself it mentions other places, is exactly as quoting the RAE, both are sourced but if it's explained below there is no need to put it again besides the source says "Bolivian Altiplano and the Peruvian Puno department" not the other way around. But okay I'll leave that source just correcting the order. However your violation of formal mediation will be reported now. 15:31, 21 March 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.87.23.193 (talk)

If you seek conflicts, please go back to where you came from in the Spanish WP. This article's discussion, though controversial, already ran its course in years past. The consensus is to present both theories and stop users who, as yourself, delete sourced material and images. Vandalism will not be tolerated.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 16:11, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

The source was there, what you reverted was your POV trying to put Peru always first thinking you can fool me, the source clearly says Bolivia first and then Peru. That's a violation of the Mediation and that's what is denounced. Your personal attacks and defamation are the ones that are disrupting something that should have respected in the first place. I spoke to you politely and requested you to respect what was mediated and you continued, that's what will be treated in the board. 200.87.23.193 (talk) 16:48, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

P.S. Precisely as you say, I can read all the past discussions and I'm reviewing the history and I know perfectly well that the consensus was made on April 2010 as the last signature says above, the edits made after that date weren't agreed whatsoever. 200.87.23.193 (talk) 17:35, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Improve article

Good, a cordial greeting to all active editors of this article, I activated my participation in this article to improve it, with all necessary references and go removing all subjective phrases and personal conclusions of previous editors. You respect the primary sources to improve the article, those wishing to participate can do so productively and started working. PD. I saw in the record that there were difficulties in the past for this reason the changes carefully and explaining each.Greetings --Nair (talk) 19:41, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Greetings, of course you're welcomed to improve the article, if you have more sources to enrich the article they'd be useful, just for the conflictual nature of the article it is advisable to pay special attention to how the points of view are represented and explained. It should be noted that there was an administrative answer regarding the earlier conflict with MarshalN20, as there wasn't any WP:Civility violation there wasn't any action, however it has been asked MarshalN20 to refrain from reverting edits as "vandalism." and to everyone to follow the WP:BRD system instead, if anyone violates the three revert rule it should be reported at WP:AN3. I have little or no interest in making more changes to the article I'm just an occasional bystander, but I think that to keep it as a reliable encyclopedic article I'll be checking it from time to time to order some things and make sure that it remains as unbiased as possible, perhaps I could consider making an account if I do so I'll announce it properly. Best Regards 200.87.23.193 (talk) 23:32, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips, all changes you made, from the date I will do it with references, will eliminate only information that is not accredited as a picture of the Altiplano, where only three cities are shown to the reader as conclusive fact that the dance was born in this area . This image has no bibliographical support. If you wish to show a general plateau would place the names of all its component parts and not just three. For this reason, remove it from the article because it is only the opinion of an editor. Greetings--Nair (talk) 23:44, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I notice that you make many assumptions. Please remember that cited material should not be deleted. The Altiplano image is cited. Altiplano and city locations are common knowledge. Claims of origin are cited in the image. Only delete material that has no support from the sources. Happy editings.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 23:50, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

(←) Guys, really don't waste your time reverting and reverting, just talk here explaining what's wrong with that image both opinions regarding that image I could say however that the yellow area is spread over Argentina and there aren't any sources saying that the Diablada was born there. so perhaps it should be fixed in any case. 200.87.23.193 (talk) 00:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Read the description page. Knowledge is power.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 00:32, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

True, the image comes to northern Argentina and covers part of Tarija in Bolivia where there are no references to the dance nation there. The image is poorly zoned, enter into consensus, I suggest you remove the image. Waiting for the opinion of others.--Nair (talk) 15:57, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I repeat, read the image's description page before commenting on it.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 22:31, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

These data are hidden to the novice user, even for the middle level, if you download the article in PDF format also shows the data mentioned, for these reasons, you must remove the image, and I repeat again, this poorly zoned.. --Nair (talk) 23:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

This [15] isn't hidden. The image will not be deleted. If you continue with this irrational argument and continue to delete the image, I will have to report your edits to the administrator's board.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 00:29, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

(←)And opened the debate on the image, if it becomes necessary to call an administrator to act as moderator.--Nair (talk) 16:27, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

The image is sourced, it has correct information, and therefore will not be deleted. Deleting sourced information is considered vandalism. You can call a moderator if you desire.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 21:47, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a primary source, the image is your job and that makes the picture a primary source wikipedia, well at least we agree that the moderator, will be called if the case requires. IP would be nice also participate, for now I'm reviewing the holdings of this space to further editing. Greetings --Nair (talk) 02:21, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

lol. That's all I'll write: lol.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 02:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

You can not remove the sign, if you want to participate do so by following the POV. --Nair (talk) 19:44, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

I am not going to follow your political POV.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 23:07, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Structure change

Will perform a structural change in the article as the introduction and they are mixing several historical data on the positions of each country. IMPORTANT: Do not erase any word, phrase or paragraph. The structure is as follows:

• 1 Introduction .-
• 2 History.-

• 3 Bolivia's position .-
• 4 Peru position .-
• 5 Posture Chile .-

• 6 See also
• 7 Notes
• 8 References

7 External links

Each posture will be in place where it belongs and will summarize, I saw that article there diablada of these countries, these are fed in detail, thus lightening the article and each historical data and position will be in place .--Nair (talk) 16:07, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Move information where it belongs, it is now summarize and edit some data that are not in context to move.--Nair (talk) 16:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

As long as you don't delete sourced material, you can improve the article. I disagree completely with your proposed structural changes due to the following reasons:

1. This is an article about the Diablada dance, not a political debate.
2. Choreography and Music should be independent of the history section.

I suggest the return of the article to its previous state (prior to your structural change), and focus on truncating all of the extra history information in the article. The new History of the Diablada article can house all of the large content information. This article should have a summary of the history. Remember that the purpose of these articles are for the people to read it, not to get bored at the second line.

Considering you are serious about improving the article, and seeing you are interested in presenting the political positions of Bolivia, Chile, and Peru; I would suggest the inclusion (at the end of the article) of a section which discusses the political postures of these three countries. Example:

• Reinvindication movements
  • Bolivian proposal
  • Chilean proposal
  • Peruvian proposal

That is all. As long as you don't delete sourced information, including the perfectly valid images, there will be no edit conflicts. Best regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 22:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Users seem to Marshall you were reported to administrators by edit war and disputed content. I did not realize this, I'll see what was the complaint made and the reasons as it hurts in some way to the editing.

On the other hand about the changes, "is not political debate, if you read carefully the changing structure of the article seeks a better short summary using the data in their respective countries, the current article about the origin of the diablada used in mostly historical data of Bolivia (Oruro). If Peru and Chile have a history you can put the summary is the respective subtitle. Maintain the proposed structure but it can change the titles of "Position" to:

• History in Bolivia (Summarize everything published so far to alleviate the article)
• Peru History
• History in Chile

With that I think would be solved. Regarding his proposal for political positions does not seem appropriate because it would extend over the article and make it boring, for the choreography and music, current data are for historical data of Bolivia.--Nair (talk) 23:29, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

In what way does it hurt the editing? You are quick to use words, but have nothing to back them up. This article must not be divided along political lines. This is not a political forum. In the same way the Spanish WP article sets this page up as a dance article, the same will happen in the English WP article. Please be aware that political POV pushing will not be tolerated. Focus on improving the dance article, not changing it into a political discussion.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 00:33, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

There is nothing political, it is more clear with your arguments, just the data is ordered according to the place for better reading. --Nair (talk) 16:23, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Already started with the restructuring, if you want to participate following the POV, do so but please do not revert the changes to be made. There are already many crashes this article and harm the progress made. --Nair (talk) 14:41, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I have to oppose the structural changes proposed here by Nair. A history article or section is beter organized chronologically and not nationally, Refering to "Chilean", "Bolivian" and "Peruvian" postures (if there are) can be done but they do rather belong in history of diablada or diablada controversy article. Also it is important to not invent camps that does not exists by linking postures of Peruvian, Chilean or Bolivian historians to that of their goverments. Some might support their goverments positions other maybe not and yet other are being used by goverments.

The proposal by Marshal to have a summarized history section seems appropiated so that a 2 year old controversy does not get an undeservedly big space, diablada has to be lookt upon a historical perspective not trough the lens of recent controversy.

So.. is somebody opposing a sumarized history section with no individual subsections? Dentren | ^Talk 15:31, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm in favor of the summarized history, and against turning the dance-related article into a political partisan structure. There does exist a History of the Diablada article, which I created exactly for the purpose of summarizing the history of this (Diablada) article.

Also, as Dentren mentions, it's not a matter of "Peruvians vs. Bolivians vs. Chileans" in their postures. The "theories" of invention come from specific places: Puno, Oruro, La Tiran, and even Potosi. By dividing the article along political lines (Peru, Chile, Bolivia), we are creating something that does not exist.

If the modern controversy is something that users really want to read, there is a final section (still empty) which I placed for the sake of making a small mention of the controversy. The rest of the article should focus on the dance. Best regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 15:53, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Welcome dentren, this interesting article about the proposal, as I understood, we had to move everything that relates to the origin of dance History of the Diablada, and put in this article only the characteristics of the dance, right?. To move forward, meanwhile I put a subtitle: Origin of the denomination,the diablada dancing. Greetings --Nair (talk) 22:18, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the deep-detailed information in History should go into the History of the Diablada article. What should be left in this article is a summary of the information. Please read WP:SUMMARY for more information. The "Origin of the Denomination" section should be re-named to "Etymology" (See the WP article on it: Etymology). However, the information you are currently posting in that section is unsourced and unreliable. The RAE dictionary is a tertiary source; and their definition of terms is not necessarily a reliable historical or anthropological analysis. Best regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 00:43, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

1 - You can not use the subtitle "etymology" is right "denomination" and this is the name of the dance and not just any word. Use "denomination" when referring to names of dances, products, religions, etc. examples here and here .

2 .- potosi theory is not valid, because they are only a few authors who talk about it, neither the government of Potosi and the cultural authorities of the claim. Besides the state of Bolivia and the cultural ministries of government officially handle oruro origin, discarding these unfounded theories of regional authorities that are not the official position of the department of Potosi.

3 .- The third level references are acceptable in wikipedia. He clarified that the definition is being used as a reference SAR historical or anthropological analysis. --Nair (talk) 15:18, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Third opinion / structure change

Response to third opinion request (restructuring of History section):

I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on Diablada and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes.

I agree with MarshallN20 on largely maintaining the existing structure and moving information into the separate History of the Diablada article. Although the controversy on origins appears to have broken down largely along geographic/national lines, the History section is currently focused on the the more essential theories of roots of the diablada. I believe that Nair's proposed restructuring of the History section would harm the clarity of the existing discussions on roots theories. It is already clearly stated which theories the academics from each of the countries subscribe to. It seems better to focus on the theories—which are at the very essence of the dance's identity—than on the more recent debates and which countries those debate participants live in. If anything, such a nationalistic focus is better suited to the History of the Diablada article.—Infoman99 (talk) 08:23, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

​

Great. Thank you Infoman99.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 12:54, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Greetings informan99 user, seeing the current situation of the article is necessary structural change but I think I was misunderstood. Explain what happened to constructive ideas for adding new participants and also to follow the WP: SUMARY:

1 Origin of the denomination

2 History

The origin of the Diablada is a matter of dispute between the countries of Peru and Bolivia. Three main locations exist for the possible origin of the dance. These places are:

• Juli, Peru: The Diablada would have been introduced in 1576 to the native Lupakas people of Juli, located near Lake Titicaca in the Altiplano of present-day Puno, Peru; and from there it allegedly spread to other parts of the Spanish domain in the Americas.
• Oruro, Bolivia: The 2001 proclamation of the Carnaval de Oruro as one of the Masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity by the UNESCO suggested that this dance had roots in the ancient dance of the Llama llama in worship of the Uru god Tiw. This used to take place in the ancient location where the modern Oruro, Bolivia is nowadays, which was a sacred place for the Urus.
• Potosí, Bolivia: The dance could have had its beginnings in another city of modern-day Bolivia, such as in the city of Potosí, back then a miner's settlement during the Spanish conquest, from where it later spread to Oruro and other parts of the Altiplano.

During the evangelism of the natives, the missionaries instilled the Christian paradigm of good and evil by teaching them their theatrical dance which was a representation of the seven deadly sins that concluded with the victory of the angels over the demons (which is how the costumes of angels and demons became associated with the dance). Ultimately, the result was a fusion between Spanish and Andean culture in the Altiplano as the original dance taught by the Jesuit missionaries adopted Andean elements.

The Diablada' represents a mixture between Christianity and Andean religions that goes as far back as 1538, where in the mines of Aullagas (in northern Potosí) the natives adopted Christian religious figures and adapted them to their indigenous religious visions. The dance eventually became part of a series of Christian religious festivities, most prominently during the celebrations to the Virgin of Candelaria (also known as the Virgin of Socavón). These Christian rituals replaced the old Andean beliefs and mythology, and the festivities changed from honouring what were considered "pagan" gods to that of honouring Christian saints and God. Over the years, the Diablada has developed uniquely in various regions of South America, which has led to variations such as the Diablada Puneña and the Diablada of Oruro.

3 Dance

4 Choreography

5 Music

6 Regional variations 7 Reinvindication movements

8 See also Would move more data history subtitle to the article "History of the Diablada" and so the data only leave the dance for better reading.--Nair (talk) 15:36, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

References

Remove theory Potosi

He takes the theory of Potosi for the following reasons:

• This theory only a few authors manage regional city.
• There is no historical or bibliographic livelihoods about dance in potosi. Dance of devils exist around the world and this is confused with the diablada dancing.
• The department of Potosi and cultural organizations have no studies that Diablada was born in Potosi, and so it does not call this dance as originating in the place
• The state of Bolivia officially manages the Diablada was born and originated in Oruro
• International organizations like UNESCO and the RAE handled as the cradle of Oruro diablada.--Nair (talk) 15:26, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I guess "He" is Marshal, are Im right? As a rule of thumb wikipedia should be inclusive which doesnt mean to give all theories equal weight. The Potosí origin should be mentioned but making clear that it has recieved less attention than other theories. Unless there is some scholarly review work on diablada origins that dismiss or omits the Potosí origin (while including and discussing origins on a broad scope) it should be included on equal grounds. Dentren | ^Talk 14:10, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

His argument is that since "the state of Bolivia" does not support the Potosi theory, then the theory should be removed. No source exists which claims the Potosi theory as a minor theory. Wikipedia "source weight" is determined by the actual quantity of sources available; logically, a source with minor supporters will have less sources (less "weight") than the rest. The Potosi theory has plenty of advocates who present the area as a likely zone for the creation of the dance. The idea itself is supported by the high importance of Potosi during colonial times.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 17:52, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I also agree with Dentren and MarshalN20 I think each point of view is explained in the body of the article citing who defends each one of them, so the reader could easily know which historians believe in this theory and which is the position of the current governments as well, more information about this matter is better in my opinion. Erebedhel - Talk 22:42, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Diablada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090609105439/http://www.hamaycan.cl:80/danzasceremoniales.htm to http://www.hamaycan.cl/danzasceremoniales.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:10, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Diablada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090927151233/http://www.la-razon.com:80/versiones/20090823_006828/nota_269_865807.htm to http://www.la-razon.com/versiones/20090823_006828/nota_269_865807.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:41, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Diablada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090401071207/http://www.drclas.harvard.edu/revista/articles/view/1005 to http://www.drclas.harvard.edu/revista/articles/view/1005
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090904134937/http://www.la-razon.com/versiones/20090820_006825/nota_253_864270.htm to http://www.la-razon.com/versiones/20090820_006825/nota_253_864270.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.correoperu.com.pe/correo/nota.php?txtEdi_id=18&txtSecci_id=72&txtSecci_parent=&txtNota_id=106612
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.correoperu.com.pe/correo/nota.php?txtEdi_id=18&txtSecci_id=72&txtSecci_parent=&txtNota_id=106612
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091224155130/http://www.micarnaval.net/mitologia.htm to http://www.micarnaval.net/mitologia.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090815145701/http://www.micarnaval.net/origen_diablada.htm to http://www.micarnaval.net/origen_diablada.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090904134937/http://www.la-razon.com/versiones/20090820_006825/nota_253_864270.htm to http://www.la-razon.com/versiones/20090820_006825/nota_253_864270.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:33, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Merge

There's a September 2018 proposal to merge this page with History of the Diablada and Oruro Diablada, and I've suggested merging here as it is the oldest article (started 2009 rather than 2011), the simplest and the broadest title. The Diablada page makes it clear that the dance originated in the Oruro region, so Oruro Diablada seems to be a synonym (or perhaps there is reason to keep the local/original dance in a separate section?). The other two pages also include history, so combining them would bring similar material together and avoid duplication of scope. Klbrain (talk) 21:17, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

The article's introduction has been vandalized to change what is clearly stated within the article's body and infobox. Regards.--MarshalN20 ^✉🕊 01:12, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

OK; given the objection and correction, happy to withdraw my support and close the proposal. Klbrain (talk) 17:14, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Diablada's origin

Wikipedians should impartially investigate in depth about this article, the dance of the "DIABLADA" is exclusively and clearly of Bolivian origin. In Bolivia there are many strong evidence of the music, choreography of the masks and clothing, its evolution and development.

There is a small town in the Andes of Peru called Puno that practices many Bolivian dances and they are the only ones who refuse to accept that the diablada is Bolivian. Bolivian dances can be danced anywhere in the world and that does not take away its Bolivian origin. Chile, Ecuador, Argentina, including many Peruvian dances scholars affirm that the "DIABLADA" is indeed a cultural expression only from Bolivia.

They are malicious actions by wanting to strip Bolivians of their cultural expressions, which is part of the identity of Bolivia. It is very ridiculous and stupid to say that the "DIABLADA" is of shared origin or of several countries. Some Catholic autosacramentals found in Juli-Peru cannot be considered the origin of the "DIABLADA". Catholic and Jesuit evangelizers came and evangelized almost all of South America, not just Peru or Bolivia. and dance of devils there are all over the world and the entire American continent from Mexico, Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Peru, Chile and Argentina and are totally different expressions from the DIABLADA. The name DIABLADA PILLAREÑA of Ecuador is recent and was taken from Bolivia, as evidenced by Ecuadorian documents. Before it was called DIABLOS DE PILLARO. Of course, the only thing that resembles the DIABLADA from Bolivia is in name.

Let's be more objective, the DIABLADA is Bolivian. For simple example, we all know that pizza is Italian even though it contains tomato that is of Mexican origin, and we do not see Mexicans protesting that the pizza is recognized as Mexican, it is Italian and it cannot be denied. Flamenco is a cultural expression of Spain and uses Peruvian CAJON instrument and that is not why Peruvians claim that Flamenco is of Peruvian origin. Or Jazz is an expression of the USA and it is also popular in Canada and that is not why Canadians claim that it is of shared origin only because it borders the United States, everyone knows that it is from the United States.

For example If some malicious Chileans happen to vandalize pages like Wikipedia, blatantly lying and claiming that Tango is a Chilean dance or shared dance and not just from Argentina. Will they do nothing just because they must be neutral?

I want to reach a consensus to correct the article, the dance is uniquely Bolivian and any expert on the subject knows it and cannot deny it. EKP70 (talk) 04:51, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to merge repetitive articles into Diablada. See below for more details. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 17:47, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

---

I propose to merge Diablada (Bolivia) into Diablada. I suspect that the "(Bolivia)" version was created in an attempt to focus on that country exclusively while expanding coverage into larger cultural traditions. That may be a worthy distinction but the two articles are nearly identical except for some musical terminology, and Bolivia is the focus of both. Dance, music, clothing, and other cultural phenomena can be covered in a single article, given the fact that both of the current articles do so with largely repetitive prose. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:41, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Also note that there is yet another article that duplicates info from the two already discussed: History of the Diablada. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:44, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that these three articles should be merged. Actually, "History of the Diablada" and "Diablada (Bolivia)" should just be deleted (as there is no content worthy of merging). These are residues from conflicts over the origin of the dance, which unfortunately are still an issue nowadays.--MarshalN20 ^✉🕊 03:31, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I will let this discussion cook for a few weeks as is common procedure, and we can see if anyone objects strongly. If nobody does, I will then handle the merges and redirects. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:44, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Also agree with the merge (as well as with removing of music genre infoboxes which is where we originally started). Diablada pillareña + Diablada puneña + Diablada in Chile might be also worth merging. Solidest (talk) 19:23, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

After several weeks, nobody has stepped up to oppose this merge, and the folks above have given good reasons for doing it. The following articles will be merged and redirected into the main Diablada article:

• Diablada (Bolivia)
• History of the Diablada
• Diablada pillareña
• Diablada puneña
• Diablada in Chile

All of the above articles are ruinously repetitive and show signs of coatracking over regional disputes about where the dance originated. Arguments have taken place not just in the talk pages but in the articles themselves. As someone from outside the countries involved, perhaps I can provide an outside perspective. It appears that Bolivia the region within the present borders of Bolivia is the winner among reliable historians, with some support here and there for other countries as the originators. The alternative viewpoints can be included with sources, but that does not require multiple near-identical articles nor arguments within the text about how that day's editor thinks the others are biased. The Diablada is a fascinating topic for which readers deserve more organization. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 17:45, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.