No, it seems like a randomly occasional description, based on a speculation of one possible use. The trouble is that archaeologists seem to assume a ceremonial or worship explanation for their finds, when there really is room for other valid reasons.
Maybe the plaza was just the local bigwig's front yard, and the gruesome mural was his way of posting "Trespassers will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law," or "Thus I defeated my enemy." Why must it be a "ritual image", and not a portrait? I used to drive by a bank every day that had a mural painted on it of an Aztec cutting out a heart, and it didn't make the bank a ceremonial location.
More likely, the plaza was the local marketplace for ages, so that's where they added the temple later. Maybe it was a playing field for llama polo. Maybe the Wallendorf Venus was just a sculpture by a guy, saying he liked big butts, and he cannot lie.
I beg to differ, it is a place where people worship money.