Jump to content

Talk:Band of Holes

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

www.world-mysteries.com/ an unreliable source

[edit]

The link itself has statements such as " What if flying machines, cars, computers, radios, televisions, nuclear weapons, lasers, spacecraft, advanced medicine, genetic engineering, and master-building-design were representations of a civilization like ours only it was firmly held in the hands of the very rich and the politically-powerful elite". It's obviously fringe and fails WP:RS. Dougweller (talk) 18:13, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

[edit]

I've looked through about a dozen pages of Google search results on this topic. There's not an obviously reliable source among them. There are lots of pictures, though, both from the air and on the ground. There doesn't seem to be any question that these holes exist, and that their general description in the not-so-reliable sources is pretty much on the money. (This isn't Bigfoot or UFOs. This is a legitimate geographical location that many have visited, or overflown, and documented.)

But where might we find some sort of reliable source about them? Lou Sander (talk) 03:53, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lou Sander, I'm guessing that they are known under some other name. I've got a JSTOR article on excavations in the Pisco Valley I can email you if you email me from my talk page. It doesn't clarify the issue but you may find it interesting. I'fe sent a lot of time searching myself but stupidly didn't think to contact the author of the article. I've done that now, perhaps she will be able to clarify things. Dougweller (talk) 10:40, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Lou Sander She was away when I emailed her. I emailed her again today, and she looked at this article and told me she'd never heard of them. (She being Helaine Silverman Professor: Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois). Dougweller (talk) 17:50, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I just spent some more time looking for sources. An alternate search term is Humay holes. There's nothing obvious that is a reliable secondary source. I did find an archaeology group from UCLA that's going to Peru this summer for a student internship experience. The Band of holes is about one hour away from their dig, all by highway. I've got a call in to the leader of the group, to see if maybe some student would like to visit the Band and write up his experiences. (Maybe the secret group of extremely wealthy people who are trying to shut this up will pay his tuition in return for his silence. If so, I'm planning a trip down there next year. I need somebody to pay off my mortgage.)
This might be a case where primary sources are OK to use in a limited way. We have plenty of photographs, a precise geographic location, etc.from primary sources that seem to be reliable. I'm thinking that in such cases, it's legitimate to use them as proof of existence, but not to make any comments or conclusions based on them. I'm no expert on these things, however. Lou Sander (talk) 22:42, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An article has been published on April 05, 2016, at the archaeology.org site, "An Overlooked Inca Wonder", http://www.archaeology.org/issues/213-1605/features/4325-an-overlooked-inca-wonder . Make of it what you will. Login54321 (talk) 13:59, 26 April 2016 (UTC)  Done Lou Sander (talk) 16:37, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Login54321: Thanks. At least now we have a recent source. Doug Weller talk 15:51, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Login54321's source led to this (free registration required) much expanded source. It included the Additional reading items that are now a part of the article. Lou Sander (talk) 18:05, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

National Geographic

[edit]

There is an article about Peruvian explorations, said to mention the holes, in National Geographic for January, 1933 — Air Adventures in Peru, by Robert Shippee. The article is presumably available in the National Geographic's archives, open only to current subscribers, of which I am not one. The first page of the article is online at HERE, mentioning "weird craters waiting to be filmed for the first time". Lou Sander (talk) 17:51, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's the aerial survey Shippee did. Doesn't take us very far as it's used by others, including Hyslop. No land-based examination.

I've asked a friend to get this:dwight wallace valles de chincha y de pisco Sitios Arqueológicos del Perú (Segunda Entrega). Valles de Chincha y de Pisco. Arqueológicas 13 And ordered, very cheaply The Royal Road of the Inca - Page 160

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=HnEKAQAAIAAJ Victor Wolfgang Von Hagen - 1976 - ?Snippet view Victor Wolfgang Von Hagen ... It moves right through pre-Inca graves of Mt. Sierpe. ... "strange and mysterious pockmarks", but when discovered and surveyed by the von Hagen expedition in 1953 and found to be unused graves, the mystery ... Doug Weller (talk) 17:53, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that's well spotted though, I didn't uncover it. How did you search for it? Doug Weller (talk) 17:54, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Expand and reorganize

[edit]

I shifted things around and added some new material from the newly-found Backdirt reference. That reference may require a free registration to access, but IMHO it's worth it. It is a well-written exposition of the site and its history, based on a very recent visit. I restored a very brief mention of Ancient Aliens, since the Backdirt visit and article were inspired by numerous inquiries that UCLA archaeologists received from viewers of that program.

The first sentence in the Description section is actually based on reference #1. I couldn't figure out how to give that reference a name that could be re-used. Maybe somebody else can take care of that. Lou Sander (talk) 14:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Band of Holes. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 11:35, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

page name

[edit]

Why is the article name "Band of Holes" instead of Monte Sierpe? the site is in Peru, not in an English-speaking country. We don't write Chichen Itza as 'cenote mouth' or some such thing. I never would have thought to look under the former. Kdammers (talk) 07:10, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand things, the "Band of Holes" is a translation of the common name for the geoglyph, whereas Monte Sierpe is the name of the hill where the geoglyph is located. That said, most of the articles in english about the site seem to blur that distinction to some degree, possibly because the phrase "band of holes" is not as distinctive as something like Stonehenge.Mighty Antar (talk) 09:35, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But the article lede does not say that the site is ON the hill; instead, it says, "The Band of Holes [is] also known in Spanish as Monte Sierpe." It is not unusual for archaeological sites to have the same name as their geographical location.Kdammers (talk) 06:17, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd appeciate informed changes to the article. When I last looked at this there was a dearth of authoritative material.Mighty Antar (talk) 11:07, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For growing crops?

[edit]

Wondering if the purpose of these holes could be for growing crops, as in currently done on Lanzarote, one of the Canary Islands? Mark Taylor (talk) 00:25, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Band_of_Holes&oldid=1250837672"