Talk:Machu Picchu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Machu Picchu has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.

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.

	Peru Portal This article is supported by the Peru WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to Peru-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	Architecture Portal This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Castle.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

An event mentioned in this article is a July 24 selected anniversary

Contents 1 GPS 2 Area 3 Resectioning? 4 Images 5 external links 6 small fixes 7 Points of Interest 8 It takes an archaeologist 9 Yale Dispute 10 GA 11 pronunciation 12 Economic impact 13 Consistent nomenclature 14 Adding a photographic tour with info 15 Battle of Machu Picchu? 16 Machu Picchu in fiction 17 Suggestion for Machu Picchu pages 18 Roads

[edit] GPS

Anyone know the GPS coordinates of Machu Picchu? That could be added to the article. --Toric 10:41, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Google Map link: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=-13.156388889,-72.539444444&spn=0.076218,0.125313&t=k&hl=en

But if you type in "Machu Picchu" in the same page, it shifts the page slightly. That URL corresponds to 13deg9min South, 72deg32min West, which is what is now given in the page text and the map image. The Japanese page which is the source of the map image clearly says 13deg7min and 72deg35min - how did this change in the conversion from Japanese to English?

The differing coordinates reflect the current inhabited place Machupicchu, near the ruins of Machu Picchu. On one geographic names database, it lists the ruins as 13 09 00 S / 72 31 00 W, and the settlement as 13 07 00 S / 72 31 00 W. The people who run the gift shops gotta live somewhere. Meateatingvegan 21:51, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Area

How much area does this place take up? It's hard to tell from the pictures. 64.216.217.244 03:37, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Resectioning?

Just thinking that once the translation is finished the article would probably benefit from some resectioning. -- Rune Welsh ταλκ 16:09, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

• I concur, but as you suggest, let's translate first. At the very least there is redundant information in the preface from the original English article. --Jacob 16:37, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

So the original English part of the article will be completely removed once the Spanish translation is done? --Dynamax 17:29, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

In addition to redundancies, the English article definitely does contain information which the Spanish does not, e.g. the fact that the locals that led Bingham to the site were Quechuans. So resectioning should include re-integrating this information. Desultor 20:26, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. --Jacob 22:15, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Images

I'm not sure on the procedure. (Do we upload them to the commons then delete from es?) But, should we move all the images to wikicommons and use them in both the es and en pages? --Jacob 16:45, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Can we get a non Japanese map like this? http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%94%BB%E5%83%8F:LocMap_of_WH_Machu_Picchu.png

I could probably edit the Japanase one. I'll get around it tomorrow once I get back to my own computer. -- Rune Welsh ταλκ 23:34, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

Done -- Rune Welsh ταλκ 22:21, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Apart from the GPS coords changing from the Japanese, why has most (but not quite all) of the water changed colour? And the dot for Cusco removed?

The German wiki de:Machu_Picchu provides similar (albeit quoting different "seconds") accuracy in the coordinates (which are not exclusively "GPS" but properly just geographic coordinates, which were around much earlier than GPS). Reliability of Google Earth's coordinates is still being debated ([1] specially at high zoom, which is where I suspect the Japanese image got its coordinates from, and so I'd rather not use them. If you convert the decimal grades these kids at MIT obtained using GPS during a class project you'll realise they're closer to what I quote in the map.

Removing the dot for Cuzco was an oversight on my part, given that I don't read Japanese and didn't have a clue of the city's location back then (I had a pretty good idea of where Lima is). Changing the color of the water was not, and in fact I like more that way. As far as I could see all the water had been changed to the new color. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 23:26, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

You're right, they're not GPS coordinates :) But I'd noticed that UNESCO give slightly different coords (http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/274 says S13 7 W72 35) and thought there must have been a reason to change them from the Japanese source. or at least state the new source. I also thought that as the page mentioned Cusco/Cuzco it would be good to see it on the map too. About the colour of the water, there are just some parts of Lake Titicaca by the Bolivian border which escaped the change.

--80.100.166.63 19:52, 25 September 2005 (UTC) I changed the picture Machu-Picchu.jpg for a high res one taken with better light conditions (early morning)from a better position and there are no people on this picture. more suitable!

Very useful, Maybe how it is defended perhaps?

--69.148.235.225 16:42, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] external links

I have removed a number of the external links, most of which were links to collections of photos taken by visitors. The Web is awash in M-P photos, and there were so many links that it made it hard to spot the useful ones that added new information. I've also done some trims and edits, such as removing the paragraph about Wayna Pichu, which said nothing ... the translation from Spanish still needs work. - DavidWBrooks 23:16, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

The NYT article, although interesting, requires registration to read it. Is this external link OK to include? 193.134.254.145 11:38, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] small fixes

I've made a couple of minor fixes to the article. Namely, the distance from Cusco to Machu Picchu was correct in the intro, but not in the location section, as was the altitude. I fixed both. The location section is largely redundant information, and should be removed if anyone feels so inclined. The inca road system section is rather confusing, and probably needs someone who knows the facts to redo it, but I linked it to the main article, and added a link to the inca trail as well.

--User:The Ostrich 18:39, 5th January 2006 (Peru Time)

I was just in Peru, and did the Inca Trail to Machu Picchu. I can assure you that the train does NOT get there from Cusco, but from Ollantaytambo. You have to take a bus from Cusco to O. then you take a train to Aguas Callentes, then you take a bus to the MP site.

The train does go from Cusco to Machu Picchu. The train stops in Poroy, Ollantaytambo and Aguas Calientes. Then the bus to MP.

[edit] Points of Interest

I was hoping that somebody could add a section giving more detail about the various archeological points of interest. The article mentions a few, including the Temple of the Sun and the Room of the Three Windows but does not go into any detail about each. I could do some research and try to add it myself, but I just wanted to check if anyone out there already had the knowledge. Thanks. --Sarfa 20:15, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] It takes an archaeologist

I wanted to get everyone's persmission before changing a couple things in this article. I am an archaeology major (note that "archaeology" has an a in it, and although the alternate spelling omits the a, we prefer to spell it this way) specializing in Andean archaeology who actually visited Machu Picchu this summer. I need to point out that the part that says that this was the "Zapa Inca's resting place" is rather redundant. "Sapa Inca" (not Zapa Inca) means the "head Inca" or in this case, the Inca Emperor, not a specific name of one of the Inca Emperors. In a section above where this is written, someone had said that Machu Picchu was built by Pachacuti, which is true, but it should be stressed that Pachacuti built it for his own use. Pachacuti was known for his expansion of the Inca Empire and by his numerous building projects. The fact that Machu Picchu is not a fortress, nor fortified at all besides being high up and hard to get to, needs to be added. For examples of Inca fortresses, see Sacsahuaman in Cuzco. That is how Inca fortifications look. Not like Machu Picchu. In my classes, I was told that Pachacuti used Machu Picchu as a sort of resort, or hunting lodge, for his own pleasure (it is located in lush surroundings, unlike most of the Inca Empire, so it would have been a nice retreat for Pachacuti, where he could have grown foods on the terraces and hunted in the surrounding areas). Reread the History section and the Sanctuary Section, and you will see the conflicts. I agree with the History section, and have many problems with the Sanctuary Section.

"Inside the citadel existed a sector assigned as the jail, where the prisoners were punished inside rock niches." - Who wrote this? And what evidence did you have? I have no idea what you are talking about.

In the section on Inca stoneworking, I would like to add a bit about the Inca's use of rounded stone walls due to the fact that one of the only two instances that the Inca ever used curved stone masonry is here at the Torreon (the other instance is the Coricancha in Cuzco). The Torreon is above what the article currently calls the "Royal Mausoleum". Quote: "The Monumental Mausoleum is a stone block with a vaulted interior and carved walls. It was used for rites or sacrifices." This name was given to the area under the Torreon by Hiram Bingham because he found Inca mummies in it. So yes, it is possible that is was a burying place, but the "sacrifices" mentioned in the article are completely erroneous. I have pictures of this, if anyone wants to include them.

Finally, would it be helpful to include a paragraph about how to go about visiting Machu Picchu? How to get train tickets, when to go, how much everything costs, etc?

Thanks, let me know. —This unsigned comment was added by 168.122.202.244 (talk • contribs) .

You don't have to ask permission. Just be bold and change it. Unfortunately, you are way more qualified than most of the people who edit Wikipedia. The last bit about visiting Mach Picchu might encroach upon Wikitravel's territory, but a simple paragraph seems fine. Thanks, and welcome! —Keenan Pepper 12:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed - your contributions sound excellent. I would not go into detail about how to visit MP - even though the Inca road system article includes far too much about the four-day hike - as it's not really suitable here.

Why not create an account before you do your edits? You can stay completely anonymous, but it helps people keep track of who has done what - so that if some no-nothing comes along and argues with you, folks can see who they are disputing with. - DavidWBrooks 12:54, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your support!! I'll go ahead and change a bit then, hopefully soon, (busy with school and such). LinaInverse 19:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Yale Dispute

I corrected this entry as it had several misconceptions:

1.- The problem is between the peruvian government and Yale University, Hiram Bingham's motives have never been questioned.

2.- There is no re-assesing going on within the government, simply a change of administration which will naturally delay proceedings.

3.- Yale University (through Bingham) borrowed the artifacts from the peruvian government, and signed documentation states that they would be returned at the peruvian government's request, which Yale has failed to do; there is no document that passes ownership to Yale.

Hdezela

[edit] GA

It is as well done as the others in GA before it. Well done. Zoli Elo 02:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] pronunciation

How do you pronounce Machu Picchu?

http://www.onelook.com/?loc=bm3&w=Machu%20Picchu --Espoo 13:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Economic impact

An article in the latest copy of Minerva states the tourism industry around this archeological site is the second largest industry in the country -- after mining. Any ideas how much income this would be? Any ideas about how to introduce this fact into the article -- after all, for many countries archeological tourism represents a fairly sizeable (& a non-polluting) source of income & should be mentioned whenever the facts can be provided & verified. -- llywrch 04:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Consistent nomenclature

The Incas distinguished between coastal roads and mountain roads, the former was called Camino de los llanos (road of the levels) and the latter was called Cápac Ñam.

What is the Incan name for "Camino de los llanos?" Seems poor form to mix languages in this context. El Mariachi 01:37, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adding a photographic tour with info

Hi, I was asked to come here to ask about including my photo tour of Machu Picchu with quite a bit of info and orientation on that site. The pages are much-used, and many have written that it's useful to them. Please have a look at www.andrys.com/peru25.html and subsequent pages on the site to see if it might not be worth adding. What could be confusing on a quick look is that it's part of a trip to highlands of Peru, but I'm not linking to the rest of it. Thanks.

I vote no: The Web is full of photo trips of M-P and the Sacred Valley. If we start linking to them all, this page would quickly become a link farm. Nothing against your site and your photos. - DavidWBrooks 21:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't mind if it IS personal if you actually took the time to go look at it to see if it might be worth adding and then decided it isn't. It's not a personal type of trip diary and does have material that others have used as a guide while there, they've written (even while on their trips). I do understand your decision not to link to them "all" or even most of them but would appreciate your evaluating the pages. Looking at current ones of this category, it seems a reasonable request. Then if you decide against it, I do fully understand and will say no more. (I just learned how to use the 4 tildes.) Thanks.Atraveler 09:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Your photos are nice, you writeup fine, and the layout is very well done. But in the end, it's a travelogue, and the Web is full of them. After all, 500 people a day use the Inca trail alone, not counting the scads of bus visitors, and from what I've seen every one takes photos the whole way - and with tripjournal.com and other sites, lots of those end up on the Web. If we link to trip journals, we're in trouble! - DavidWBrooks 11:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, thanks for taking the time, David. - Atraveler 10:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

David, I've a question on the ability to Edit in your section on "Photography" or 'Guides, Descriptions, Photography' in which you have included photo galleries.

I added a link to the non-travelogue version of my photos of and guide to Hiram Bingham's "sectors" at Machu Picchu, at http://www.pbase.com/andrys/machu .

These are just photographs uploaded as a gallery in 2004, showing where the more known and less known areas of Machu Picchu are, with regard to Bingham's assigned sectors.

The photos include areas that aren't the usual pics on the Net. I'm puzzled because any google search for "machu picchu photos" will show that the "travelogue" you didn't want is rated extremely high in interest for people looking for photographs with information. But I did understand your reasoning for not including any kind of travelogue even if impersonal and focused on the site.

However, the photo gallery I added this week is just photos with lots of information, while your 4th gallery "Machu Picchu Photos" is just a few photos with LOTS of ads. I honestly don't get it. I'm beginning to think you decide on a personal basis.

If you just decided to not include any more photo galleries whatsoever, you should just close the area and not offer it for editing. While I see the Diff-page with my addition, I didn't see any reason given for just removing it. I care because I did put a lot of work into making it useful and have found that most Peru sites have linked to it and said it was very useful -- without telling me or asking me. So it puzzles me you seem to find it even less useful than a gallery with 5 photos with Tons of ads.

I've understood your not wanting any kind of photodiary, even if an impersonal one. I just don't understand your removing, from "photography" the purely pbase-located photo guide to the scenes as they relate to "sectors" and showing what the visitor can expect to see all around the sites instead of just the usual stock shots). Atraveler 13:27, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

You're right that a group run by a bunch of volunteers doesn't always do a good job of being consistent, and that the gallery you point is pathetic and should be removed - in fact, I just removed two of them. Don't take it personally, though; that way lies madness. - DavidWBrooks 18:21, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, if you'd kept them while taking time to remove mine, alone, I -would- have had a reason to take it personally. Thanks for being more a bit more consistent. I think you ought to just call that area "Guides, Descriptions" and eliminate "Photography" so you don't get more trouble with the likes of some of us  :-) Atraveler 11:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Excellent thought. - DavidWBrooks 21:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

---

Could somebody review the statement about a gas chamber? It appears to be totally insane. Thanks.

Obvious vandalism. I've removed it. - DavidWBrooks 22:13, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of Machu Picchu?

The Spanish version of this article doesn't mention anything about this battle, nor did I ever hear of this in 12 years of attending school in Peru... can someone kindly point out the source for this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cuaya (talk • contribs) 15:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

I have removed it, after failing to find any reference in EB or elsewhere. It's embarrassing it remained here that long; I've certainly accepted it mindlessly. - DavidWBrooks 00:03, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Machu Picchu in fiction

Machu Picchu is a well known site and is likely to appear in many of places. That doesn't mean the appearance is significant or important. There are no citations in this section and "appears" and "is referenced" doesn't seem to be a good reason to list it here. I am going to remove the whole list. If there is something noteworthy to include, discuss it here and provide a source before including it. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 23:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestion for Machu Picchu pages

I believe that Machu Picchu information can be much improved. Some material is good, however much is inaccurate with poor descriptions or just wrong. Some Information is referenced from little known and doubtful sources.

Machu Picchu deserves better. Knowledge about the Inca and Machu Picchu has increased immensely thanks to efforts of a number of dedicated researchers. In particular, the work of NGS explorer, Johan Reinhard, Burger and Salazar at Yale, Ken and Ruth Wright (Inca engineering and water studies) and the contribution of Peruvian archaeologists working continuously at the site. All pretty much agree on the major points of interpretation of Machu Picchu based upon accumulated archaeological evidence. A summary and details of the site should come from these credible published sources. For general interest, the pages should include travel, spiritual, mythological and other topics but in separate sections, not mixed with the scientific presentation.

When time permits, I would like to work on updating the Wikepidia information along with contributions from others. My own Machu Picchu/ Inca web page can be viewed at: www.adventurespecialists.org/machupicchu.html. Comments are welcome…Gary Ziegler

Sounds great - get to work! (Note: new comments go on the bottom of talk pages) - DavidWBrooks 16:50, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I have just now uploaded a new introduction statement for Machu Picchu. More to follow as time permits... Cheers, Gary Ziegler

If you're the anonymous IP who rewrote the introduction, I'm afraid it was much inferior, with less content and more chattiness, and in neither wiki nor encyclopedia style. I've reverted it. Maybe you'd like to put your proposed rewrite on this Talk page for discussion first. - DavidWBrooks 14:12, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Roads

From the article: The Incas distinguished between coastal roads and mountain roads, the former was called Camino de los llanos (road of the levels) and the latter was called Cápac Ñam. Well the mountain road name seems to be Quechua, Camino de los llanos is definately Spanish. The Incans did not speak Spanish. This needs to be changed, it implies either that Cápac Ñam is Spanish or that Camino de los llanos is Quechua. Does anybody know the Quechua name for the coastal roads? omnijohn 05:35, 5 March 2007 (UTC)