Talk:Guanche mummies

Conducting overhaul

I am currently conducting a major overhaul of this article in order to fix major flaws in style, referenced material, etc. Updated article will include organized sections of information, citations, and proper reference section. Please let me know of any other suggestions to improve this article. -- Saint Soren (talk) 12:27, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Overhaul is now complete -- Saint Soren (talk) 05:49, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion 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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Guanche mummies/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MusikAnimal (talk · contribs) 05:56, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I'll gladly review this one. Expect comments in the coming days. — MusikAnimal ^talk 05:56, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Issues

Welp, I have to admit, this is pretty good. Just a few concerns:

Lead

• Main article: Guanches

While not inherently wrong, I question the need for a {{main}} template when Guanche is linked in the first sentence. For example, Egyptian mummies does not have a hatnote for Egyptians, nor does Moai have one for Easter Island. Just feels a little non-standard to me.

Historical record

• “Early explorers also reported some of the mummification methods being utilized by the Guanche, though many of these claims have yet to be supported by evidence.”

I question the inclusion of such a vague statement that conveys only speculation. This may lean toward WP:VAGUE, though that guideline is more about wording, rather than what should be considered encyclopedic. What are your thoughts?

Other than that everything looks good. Verifying the sources was a pain... I had to create JSTOR account, and the website is apparently "turned off" late at night. Anyway, it all checks out! The tone is right where it should be, very neutral, and I'm pretty happy with the prose. I'm no expert on Guanche mummies, but from all the reading I did with the sources it sounds like we've got the bulk of what we would want to cover in the article. — MusikAnimal ^talk 01:15, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Y Due to lack of response, I've gone ahead and made the above changes in order to pass this nomination. Hopefully the nominator, User:Saint_Soren will return to Wikipedia to help write more good articles. — MusikAnimal ^talk 21:22, 3 January 2014 (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.

Time

"The majority of Guanche mummies were made during the eras prior to Spanish settlement of the area in the 15th century." Is there any mummia that was made later than the Spanish settlement of the area in the 15th century?--koppchen (talk) 10:34, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Guanche mummies. 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/20131031043012/http://www.mummytombs.com/mummylocator/group/guanche.htm to http://www.mummytombs.com/mummylocator/group/guanche.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) 20:31, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Viscera

Guanche mummy of Madrid says that it conserves the viscerae, including the brain. This article however makes it as if evisceration was the standard process. --Error (talk) 22:51, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

There were probably several different types of processes.--95.20.232.162 (talk) 18:12, 9 May 2024 (UTC)