Talk:Great Pyramid of Giza
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Great Pyramid of Giza has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. |
 |
Great Pyramid of Giza is either included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version (the project page is at WPCD Selection). Please maintain high quality standards, and if possible stick to GFDL and GFDL-compatible images. |
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Archaeology, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
 |
This article is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Egyptological subjects. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information). | |||
 GA |
This article has been rated as GA-Class on the Project's quality scale. | |||
| Top | This article is listed on this Project's core articles page. | |||
 |
This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Architectural history. | |
| GA |
This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Top | This article has been rated as top-importance on the assessment scale. |
|
| May – August 2006 |
| Archive 2 |
Contents |
[edit] Automatic peerreview
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and may or may not be accurate for the article in question.
- Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at WP:LEAD. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[1]
- Consider adding more links to the article; per WP:MOS-L and WP:BTW, create links to relevant articles.
- Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space -
between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18 mm.[2] - Per WP:MOSNUM, when doing conversions, please use standard abbreviations: for example, miles -> mi, kilometers squared -> km², and pounds -> lb.
- Per WP:MOSNUM, please spell out source units of measurements in text; for example, "the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth.[3]
- Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at WP:GTL.
- There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view. For example,
- Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
- Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “
Allpigs are pink, so we thought ofa number ofways to turn them green.”
- Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “
- As is done in WP:FOOTNOTE, for footnotes, the footnote should be located right after the punctuation mark, such that there is no space inbetween. For example, change blah blah [2]. to blah blah.[2]
- Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a. [5]
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Markh 20:51, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The hight
It seems that the article is inconsitent about the hight of the pyramid:
In the fact box, the hight is listed to 146 meters. In the text, the hight is stated as 146.6 meters, which should be 147 when written without decimals.
[edit] fully habitable?
Would I be correct in assuming that the succession box referene to the pyramid being a fully habitable building, is purely a term of art? -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. 12:47, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Section "Historical Context" - Bizarre Estimate of Time Required For Construction
The opening of the section "Historical Context" reads as follows: Believed by mainstream Egyptologists to have been constructed in approximately 20 years and 20 days... Does it strike anyone else as odd, that we have this degree of precision of the time taken to construct a building, when the constuction methods used, and the size and skill of the workforce employed, and the actual structure of the building, are all either quite unknown or known only with great uncertainty, and which therefore must be guessed at. In other words, "20 years" might well be acceptable as an estimate, but the addition of the "20 days" can not be taken seriously. Who put that in there, I wonder. I am taking it out. Hi There 01:26, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Evidence for casting of stones rather than quarrying
I ran across this article [1]. Should this theory at least be mentioned in the article somewhere? --NoahElhardt 00:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
You know, I came across either that same article or a similar one reporting the same facts, linked via the Anomalist, a day or two ago. I actually came here to find out what WP had about such a theory, which was completely new to me. However, I was so astounded by the "20 years and 20 days to build the pyramid" claim that I completely forgot about it. Anyway, to me, the source is reputable and both the source and the researchers seem credible. My opinion is that, it should be mentioned in the article, but I would prefer if someone more involved in the article than I am, would work it in. I do not like just kinda jetting in, making changes to other people's work, and then going on my merry way. Unless, of course, no one seems to either care, or be paying attention. So we will see. If we get no response in a few days, we will make the changes ourselves. Hi There 12:58, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
