Talk:Casma–Sechin culture

(Redirected from Talk:Casma/Sechin culture)
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Bradv in topic Requested move 17 August 2018

Requested move 17 August 2018

edit
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved to Casma–Sechin culture. There is a consensus to retain both names, but to avoid the slash per naming conventions. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bradv 19:18, 2 September 2018 (UTC)Reply


Casma/Sechin cultureSechin ComplexWP:SLASHJustin (koavf)TCM 20:14, 17 August 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. Dekimasuよ! 03:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Oppose. My problem is that the title Sechin Complex is not inclusive enough to describe the topic. The several archaeological remains of the culture are found not only in the Sechin River valley, but also in the Casma River Valley. The title Sechin Complex might be interpreted as excluding the ruins in the Casma Valley. The title Casma/Sechin culture makes clear that all these ruins were similar in culture, existed contemporaneously, and were possibly politically united for part of their 2,000 year history.

Yes, the name Sechin Complex is often used to describe this grouping of ancient settlements. However, as several of the ruins already bear the Sechin name (Sechin Alto, Sechin Bajo, and Cerro Sechin), I also thought it would be better if the article bore a more encompassing and less confusing name than Sechin Complex.

There is also precedent. The culture found about 100 miles distant is described in the article titled Norte Chico civilization. One reason that title was chosen was that it is more inclusive than other possible titles such as Caral or Caral-Supe civilization.

I understand there is a perceived problem with the slash between Casma/Sechin. Fine, change it to a dash.Smallchief (talk) 03:16, 25 August 2018 (UTC)Reply


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.