Talk:Stonehenge: Difference between revisions
m Reverted edits by 99.112.178.43 (talk) to last version by 50.44.74.130 |
→Edit request on 20 December 2011: new section |
||
Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
Thanks for [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stonehenge&diff=prev&oldid=458006328 this edit]. I was wondering why I never noticed that link, and I found you had just now added it. --[[User:Ed Poor|Uncle Ed]] ([[User talk:Ed Poor|talk]]) 18:45, 29 October 2011 (UTC) |
Thanks for [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stonehenge&diff=prev&oldid=458006328 this edit]. I was wondering why I never noticed that link, and I found you had just now added it. --[[User:Ed Poor|Uncle Ed]] ([[User talk:Ed Poor|talk]]) 18:45, 29 October 2011 (UTC) |
||
== Edit request on 20 December 2011 == |
|||
{{edit semi-protected|answered=no}} |
|||
<!-- Begin request --> |
|||
Open the Stonehenge article by describing the monument. I wanted to know how tall the stones are, and how heavy, because otherwise the question of how they were transported to the site is moot. |
|||
Lacking this basic information, the article is poor. |
|||
<!-- End request --> |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/67.217.126.250|67.217.126.250]] ([[User talk:67.217.126.250|talk]]) 17:04, 20 December 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:04, 20 December 2011
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Stonehenge article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 100 days |
Stonehenge was a History good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
|
||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Ball bearings
Interesting theory in current (March April) issue of British Archaeology: The one with archaeological evidence to support it describes how carved stone or oak ball bearings running in grooved oak tracks could have been used to move the stones. The article will probably be placed online in due course. Is it strong to enough to overcome editors' understandable reluctance to add yet another piece of speculation from a university department of archaeology?--Old Moonraker (talk) 13:10, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
- Lots of methods "could have" been used to move the stone. HHowever, if there is no evidence whatsoever of oak ball bearings or grooved oak tracks then this is really just idle speculation. Personally I prefer the hot-air balloon made out of animal hides Cheers, DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 03:31, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link to the animation, but I couldn't get enough lift to make it work. Is there any archaeological evidence for mulberry cultivation or silk production, to make a lighter envelope? --Old Moonraker (talk) 08:31, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- At 120m diameter, 5mm hide thickness and 4 tonnes of rope you need 76C over ambient temp to lift one bluestone, 93C over ambient temp to lift one sarsen. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 08:45, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- Obviously they couldn't have reached such temperatures from wood; this would have required a more concentrated energy source. Has anybody considered methane, readily available from the cattle herds needed to provide the leather? --Old Moonraker (talk) 09:15, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- At 120m diameter, 5mm hide thickness and 4 tonnes of rope you need 76C over ambient temp to lift one bluestone, 93C over ambient temp to lift one sarsen. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 08:45, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link to the animation, but I couldn't get enough lift to make it work. Is there any archaeological evidence for mulberry cultivation or silk production, to make a lighter envelope? --Old Moonraker (talk) 08:31, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
'Axeheads' grammar
In the cause of smooth readability, please, please could we have a comma, only one little comma, after "stone 53"? Or preferably a semicolon after 53 then delete the following "and". Or simply put a period (full-stop) after 53 and delete the "and". L0ngpar1sh (talk) 01:42, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Celtic people?
Did Celtic people build stonehenge? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.103.144.218 (talk) 23:35, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- No. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 23:43, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- Definitely not. Stonehenge was built a millennium or so before the Celts came to Britain. 124.168.181.224 (talk) 01:20, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
File:Stonehenge-elipse.JPG Nominated for Deletion
An image used in this article, File:Stonehenge-elipse.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 26 July 2011
| |
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:09, 26 July 2011 (UTC) |
What it's for
Thanks for this edit. I was wondering why I never noticed that link, and I found you had just now added it. --Uncle Ed (talk) 18:45, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Edit request on 20 December 2011
It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at Stonehenge. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)
This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".
The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |
Open the Stonehenge article by describing the monument. I wanted to know how tall the stones are, and how heavy, because otherwise the question of how they were transported to the site is moot.
Lacking this basic information, the article is poor.
- Former good article nominees
- Old requests for peer review
- C-Class England-related articles
- Top-importance England-related articles
- WikiProject England pages
- C-Class Wiltshire articles
- Top-importance Wiltshire articles
- C-Class Architecture articles
- Top-importance Architecture articles
- C-Class Museums articles
- Mid-importance Museums articles
- C-Class Archaeology articles
- Top-importance Archaeology articles
- C-Class Historic sites articles
- Top-importance Historic sites articles
- WikiProject Historic sites articles
- Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests