Cannabis Sativa

Template:Vital article

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

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cjhess, Christieguzman, Carinaterrasi, Boggsnatalie.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maximum Block Weight

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

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)

TFA

Do you think this article is still up to FA standards? After all, it was last reviewed in 2008, and I'm worried it may not meet the standard. Blue Jay (talk) 13:12, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blue Jay, if you have specific concerns, you could list them here and then this can be added to the Wikipedia:Unreviewed featured articles/2020 process. CMD (talk) 05:36, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks! Blue Jay (talk) 05:38, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Missing citation / dubious claim

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.

Wikipedia:Unreviewed featured articles/2020/2004–2009

This article was reviewed as part of the Wikipedia:Unreviewed featured articles/2020/2004–2009 drive. The article has numerous problems as listed below, if the article isn't updated then a WP:FAR will be needed.

  • There are statements that need updating. For example "Several countries such as France, Japan, and China are currently involved in various Angkor Wat conservation projects."
  • There are statements which need a reference such as "Virtually all of its surfaces, columns, lintels and even roofs are carved." and "Restoration work was interrupted by the Cambodian Civil War and Khmer Rouge control of the country during the 1970s and 1980s, but relatively little damage was done during this period"
  • There are dead URL's such as "http://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/specials/ancient-mysteries/angkor-wat-temples/"
  • There is a leadcite problem
  • There is a citation needed tag in the history section
  • The first paragraph of the central structure section is unreferenced
  • The talk page says the article has a dubious claim, with which I agree.

Desertarun (talk) 16:05, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply