Jump to content

Talk:Angkor Wat

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleAngkor Wat is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 26, 2005, and on May 19, 2021.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 26, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
July 30, 2005Featured article candidatePromoted
April 28, 2008Featured article reviewKept
Current status: Featured article

Maximum Block Weight

[edit]

The article states a maximum weight for sandstone blocks of 1.5 tonnes, this would mean a volume of around 20 cubic feet per block. I have just visited the site and there are many blocks of stone far in excess of this volume. I measured one pillar in a colonnade at 12 ft by 1.5 ft by 1.5 ft with many more of similar dimensions - thereby giving a volume of around 27 cubic feet. Then on the second level near an exit is an abandoned block of 52 cubic feet. On the third level the entrances are flanked by great pillars which were inaccessible to the public (as it was a special day for Buddhists), they are possibly twice the dimensions of the ones in the colonnade. All of this suggests that the maximum weight of any block is at least 3.5 tonnes. Iain 10:08, 14 February 2017

Featured article

[edit]

This is quite a good article. I think with an expanded history section and inline citations, it could be a featured article. Tuf-Kat 05:38, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

Citations should be easy enough- I've got everything I used to hand. I found a great old French pic for the History section, and I'm working on a plan of the temple which should see the light of day fairly soon. Mark1 08:47, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Missing citation / dubious claim

[edit]

Under construction techniques is the line: Moreover, unlike the Egyptian pyramids which use limestone quarried barely 0.5 km (0.31 mi) away all the time, the entire city of Angkor was built with sandstone quarried 40 km (25 mi) (or more) away.[74]

The claim about where the Egyptian pyramid limestone came from I think is false, see e.g. https://www.nms.ac.uk/explore-our-collections/stories/world-cultures/ancient-egyptian-collection/ancient-egyptian-collection/pyramid-casing-stone/#:~:text=The%20limestone%20casing%20blocks%20came,The%20Great%20Pyramid%20casing%20stone.

Guinness World Records?

[edit]

I see this is a claim only attributed due its contestation, but it seems rather egregious that Guinness World Records is mentioned even once in this featured article? It seems obviously preferable to me to soften the claim to "one of the largest" and possibly supply more robust sourcing instead. Remsense 04:58, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 November 2024

[edit]

"change Hindu-Buddhist to Buddhist" Dhanrajmingar (talk) 23:26, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --AntiDionysius (talk) 23:29, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]