Talk:Egyptian pyramids/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

North-to south structure

Listing the pyramid sites in an upstream direction is a nice touch, but a map would be a lot of help. Surely there must be a Photoshop jockey out there who can hack one of the CIA maps and mark all the sites on it? Also, there are a couple of minor pyramids further upstream that should be included, too: see here. –Hajor 05:54, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Text from Egyptian pyramid

Which I'm about to delete and turn into a redirect. For the record:

Egyptian pyramids are best known as the tombs of pharaohs, the former living god rulers of Egypt. The best known is the Great Pyramid of Giza, one of three large pyramids on the Giza necropolis adjacent to the Sphinx and the city of Cairo. picture!!!

Other pyramids at Gaza include the two large pyramids of Khafre and Menkaure; these three pyramids together are the pyramids most commonly associated with Ancient Egypt. The three pyramids are sited close to each other and are often depicted together in art. Other Egyptian pyramids exist at Saqqara, including the Pyramid of Djoser, whose stepped construction indicates how the pyramid evolved from the mastaba style tomb; and the even earlier Pyramid of Unas, where the Pyramid Texts first appear. –Hajor 19:23, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)klddnfklm

Temporary removal

I've removed the following paragraphs until they can be re-written in a somewhat less breathless manner:

It was reported by some caravan travellers that while they were travelling in the midst of the scorching desert, they could see the Great Pyramids at Giza days before they reached the only remaining wonder of the world! This gives you an idea of how big the pyramids really are!

Basically, the Pyramids at Giza are a sort of family tree. The Great Pyramid, was built by Cheops. It is the largest pyramid at Giza.The second pyramid was built by Cheop's son- Khafre. Khafre's pyramid is a bit smaller than Cheops' in order of respect for his father. Khafre also built the mighty Sphinx, to guard the Pyramid. The next one along, was built by Khafre's son- Mycerinus. This pyramid is smaller than his father's and grandfather's. It's all confusing stuff! The pyramids near these terrific trio are of the minister's and the Pharaohs' wives.

'Why is the Great Pyramid an ancient wonder of the world?' is what a lot of people ask. The Great Pyramid was the tallest monument ever when it was built. Sceintists have come to the calculations, that the builders of the Great Pyramid laid down a stone cemented and everything,of an average of about every three seconds! This was amazing! Even now, let alone in those ancient historic days! This is why people think that the Ancient Eyptians were a superior race from a diffrent planet. (Aliens!)

--Gene_poole 02:04, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject: Fact and Reference Check Work is Excellent

Excellent work on the fact and reference check for this article! I realized that I had an uneasy feeling because I doubted some of the articles here, even though they are great and Wikipedia is great! With references I feel much less uneasy, and whats great is pretty soon Wikipedia will become perhaps the most credible source of information if all the facts are referenced :). --ShaunMacPherson 07:17, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

How many pyramids?

"Approximately 90 pyramid structures of various sizes and in various states of preservation exist in Egypt today."

What's the source for this? A question on google answers[2] asked just this, and the researcher said that there were 110 pyramids, although some of these are "in a state of great disrepair and almost unrecognisable."

It also says that there are 67 completed structures. While the source for this looks credible enough[3], I definitely won't trust the first source[4], where they got the 110 figure. I'm actually surprised that they would use this as a source; if I'm not mistaken, it's a geocities-like free website registration site. Anybody know what the actual number is? (please provide source) - If you find the source please change all the different numbers. There are atleast two different number telling how many pyramids there is. Frazzydee|✍ 22:09, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

See this search. Probably we should report that the number varies from x to x. --Alterego 01:43, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)

Were have all the photographs gone?

Where have all the photographs gone from this article? I was the one who originally sought and gained permission from the owner to include them, so why have they been deleted? --Gene_poole 23:22, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Do not delete the image links from this page. Thanks to whoever it was who deleted the images I'm now going to have to upload them all over again, however I won't have time to do this for a few more days. --Gene_poole 02:26, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I checked the history of the page for the images. it looks like you didn't add the proper copyright notices to the images and they were deleted. Cyberia23 18:42, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Pictures all gone again! I will see whether I can dig some out, I dont have access to replacement images for all of them though Markh 14:35, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I have access and permission from the image owners to replace all the images that have been deleted. I intend doing so when I have a few hours spare - hopefully before February 2006. --Gene_poole 10:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I have just uploaded a some replacement images for some of the missing ones. Hope these are OK Markh 14:23, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Given the direction of the shadows, how can the image of Giza be from the south-west? Mehtopa 19:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

It's not. Someone replaced the perfectly good picture that was there before with the awful piece of rubbish that's there now, and didn't bother changing the caption. When I find the time I intend putting all the earlier pictures back again. --Gene_poole 06:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Why do people keep vandalizing this page? Cyberia23 23:43, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Anonamly

Theres a bit of disagreement between the claim on this page that "The Great Pyramid of Khufu...is the largest pyramid in Egypt and was the tallest man-made structure in the World until 1888." and Eiffel tower (which I assumed the citation was refering to at 986-1063ft). The eiffel tower article claims the washington monument (555ft) was the worlds previously tallest structure. Khufu is 455ft. Perhaps the citation needs checking for as a Reliable source? --Joopercoopers 12:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Why are there only three?

i need an answer
- There aren't Markh 18:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Three what?... if you refer to pyramids, please read the article, there are between 80 and 110 pyramids in Egypt... Nanahuatzin 01:36, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Why are there no dates anywhere? Once or twice you've mentioned the dynasty of consstruction, but no dates. Letumbillon 00:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

New Evidence to Suggest the Pyramids were CAST from concrete

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20070522/sc_livescience/thesurprisingtruthbehindtheconstructionofthegreatpyramids

Incredible. Check it out. Intranetusa 17:03, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Much to my surprise, this appears not to be National Enquirer stuff. Check out http://www.materials.drexel.edu/Pyramids/ on the site of the Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Among other things, this links the relevant paper, published in the Journal of the American Ceramic Society, which I'm pretty certain is a peer-reviewed research journal. I'm not qualified to have any independent judgment on this, but I suspect that someone who is should look through the literature and see what kind of reaction Barsoum's claims are getting. - 17:42, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion

As part of the WP:UCGA cleanup of GA tags, I found that there's some question about this page's GA quality. There's a lack of references (which may be on subpages but should need to be repeated on the front page), the external links can be cleaned up (using the [http://www.example.com Page Title] formatting), and some of the language is edging out of WP:NPOV and would be best supported by references. It's not far off, so for right now I'm just suggesting that these areas be improved. --Masem 13:19, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Pyramid shape

Copied over from discussion at WP:FAC.

Christopher is stupid opening phrase on 'descending rays' is misleading - the reason pyramids are the shape they are, is that if you want to build big, it is about the only structure you can build without any knowledge of architecture. -- Solipsist 21:39, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The solar symbolism of the pyramid shape and "descending rays" is widely accepted. The suggestion that the Egyptians had "no knowledge of architecture", is patent nonsense. Pyramids are extremely sophisticated engineering achievements and they were built by people who knew what they were doing. And what they were doing was dictated primarily by cultural and religious concerns - not engineering limitations. --Gene_poole 13:17, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm not disagreeing that there was much symbolism such as the 'descending rays' associated with the building of Egyptian pyramids. However, the principle reason they are the shape they are emphatically is associated with engineering reasons. The Egyptians were the first really great builders and engineers, but they mostly had to learn by trial and error. There are absolute limits to how wide an span you can bridge with a stone beam and this restricts your options for building tall. Without more sophisticated engineering, you are not going to be able to build anything to a height of 150m except by using the shape of a pyramid. (You could also use a triangular based pyramid or a cone, but both are more complex and still limit the angle of the faces to around 45°.)

The exact limiting angle is called the angle of repose and depends on the shape of the material being piled. Anything steeper will just slide and fall down. (Incidentally, this is also why you don't see many mountains with faces steeper than 45°, norsand dunes with faces steeper than 35°)

It is pretty clear that the Egyptians would have liked to build steeper, but trial and error on early pyramids such as Meidun and Dashur taught them that they couldn't. You can also see steeper brick walls at Luxor Temple, but you couldn't get much taller than these.

Even with more sophisticated architecture, man wasn't able to build anything much taller than the pyramids at Giza, until the twentieth century. The romans did quite well with the Pont du Gard at 50m. Medieval cathedral builders did very well with Salisbury Cathedral at 123m in the 13th century, and eventually managed to top 150m with Cologne Cathedral at 157m in 1880 and Ulm Cathedral at 161m in 1890. Even then medieval stone masons were often working on trial and error - quite a few cathedrals collapsed during their construction. It wasn't until the development of the steel framed skyscraper in Chicago that buildings taller than 200m could be constructed. -- Solipsist 10:08, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'm familiar with the basic engineering principles and history of architecture as they apply to the height limitations of masonry construction, and I agree that pyramid-shaped buildings are, relative to other types of structures, easier to build if height is the main driver - however there are other examples of large ancient buildings as as tall as or taller than the majority of Egyptian pyramids, and they were built on entirely different bases. For example, the ziggurats of Mesopotamia were of similar scale, but built of stepped, sections butteressed by ramps with near-vertical walls, and the pyramids of Meroe had inclinations of 70 degrees. Egyptian pyramids on the other hand had a similar shape and inclination, no matter if they were 150 m or 5 m in height, so as I see it, the matter becomes one of to what degree did engineering considerations dictate the Egyptian pyramid shape. I suspect the answer is that it was probably a combination of practical necessity and religious symbolism (at least initially, for the really big ones), which evolved into a purely religious/cultural/iconographic norm as time passed. --Gene_poole 01:56, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I seem to be the only person who has given a rational explanation for the pyramidal shape of these great Egyptian monuments (that it derives from the way a sand pile forms naturally if built on a square base). See my article 'The origin and purpose of the Pyramids' in 'New Humanist', December 1990. Acknowledgement would be appreciated. 80.192.82.193 13:50, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Fecal balls

I read somewhere that they are a stylized version of the dung balls made by beetles. Egyptians would see the beetle forming a shitball and later a new beetle emerge from it. Hence the sacred beetle (scarab#The Scarabs of Ancient Egypt) knew about rebirth and made its own "pyramids". Of course, the shapes of pyramids and balls are different. what do you know about this theory?

I've never heard of such a theory. I'd say it is drawing a very long bow indeed to suggest that pyramids are "stylised" spheres. As far as I'm aware the scarab beetle's propensity for rolling dung balls pooo la ki as symbolic of the movement of the solar disc across the sky, so any connection with pyramids would be tangential at best.--Gene_poole 23:59, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Angles

I came to this page to found out what angles the sides of the pyramids had to the ground. I have no idea where to find that information from a good source, so it would be nice if anyone could add that :) 62.143.117.130 21:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC)--

Dates

Hi, I came to the page wanting the dates the pyramids were constructed and found little to help. I'm a new contributor but don't mind having a go at adding them if others agree that it is an omission. The data are out there - some in the 'pedia itself - they're just a bit scattered and I may need a bit of a hand as a newcomer. First off, would a list or an addition to each section suit better? Looking forward etc. --Kylemew 15:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Could somebody add some dates to this article? I hit the reference as a quick way to check the dates of the pyramids, but find this conspicuous in its absence. 75.35.248.155 16:23, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the response everyone. I'll go ahead anyway and do it as a separate section/table based on dynasty. Sorry if this sounds a bit grumpy, its because I am. --Kylemew 10:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)--Kylemew 10:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Reference list

If someone could reconcile the currently conflicted references and notes sections it would be appreciated. --Gene_poole 09:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Size of Great Pyramid

One billionth of the radius of the Sun is 69.55 centimetres. That's not a very big pyramid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.73.254.82 (talk) 11:38, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposed Egyptian copyright law

See this BBC story. It seems bizarre that Egypt could claim copyright over a model made in, say, France, and it's clearly unenforceable in practice. But IANAL, so who knows? 86.132.141.14 (talk) 01:48, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Vandelism

please note in the first line ( HI PAT! ) and ( Smallest Constructions ) please edit or roll back.

I just reverted some more vandelism. --87.78.127.87 (talk) 21:50, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
theres a line there about osama bin laden bombing one of the pyramids... please edit or roll hell (Sure.....)

vandalism....

I noticed some vandalism near the bottom of the page, but my lackluster wiki skills failed me. so, anyone else interested enough to fix it up? 142.167.227.206 (talk) 19:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)Psi

What are you referring to? J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 20:07, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Stars

On discovery channel they claim that the positions of the pyramids are supposed to mimic positions of stars on the sky, so that the pyramids are supposed to symbolize the heavens or something like that. - User:193.216.89.72 01:23, 29 Dec 2004

Yes, the usual claim is that the three main pyramids of the Giza Plateau, which are nearly, but not quite in a straight line, have an alignment and spacing which matches the three stars in Orion's belt. There are then a few other outlying pyramids which more or less match the positions of other stars in the constellation. This theory goes in and out of favour, but the history of matching patterns to asterisms is not good.

There are also a couple of very straight narrow shafts leading up from the King's chamber of the Pyramid of Cheops, which are thought to align with stars in the constellation of Orion at various times of the year (once corrected for precession). Again, the significance of these shafts is debated, but it isn't clear what else they might be for.

It is certainly known that the Ancient Egyptians were interested in the alignment of the stars. There is also an inscription in the Pyramid of Onnos which reads

A stairway to heaven is prepared for him, and on it he ascends to heaven. He rises in a great cloud of incense. Onnus flies like a bird.

and is thought to explain some of the spiritual significance behind the construction of the pyramids. (I don't know of any connection to Led Zeppelin). -- Solipsist 08:53, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The apparatus or boarding ramp used to access the Airship Zeppelin in Germany was called "The Stairway to Heaven" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.229.13.65 (talk) 20:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Source for opening statements

The photography website is a perfectly reliable source to use in support of a generic opening statement that is both verifiably factually correct and broadly reflective of mainstream archaeological and popular opinion. --Gene_poole (talk) 23:05, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

It's a personal website by someone who is not an Egyptologist, archaeologist, etc. Surely you are aware that we normally can't use personal websites this way? If you think the lead needs a citation, I'm sure you can find one by an authoritative source. See WP:SPS "Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, forum postings, and similar sources are largely not acceptable. Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. However, caution should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so." Doug Weller (talk) 04:36, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

You'd have a valid point if the cited source was saying something controversial or at variance to mainstream opinion. It doesn't, so there's no issue. We don't require a quote from Zahi Hawas to verify that the pyramids are really immense, and that Khufu's pyramid was the tallest structure on earth until relatively recently. Frankly, I don't see the need for sourcing those statements at all - but given that someone took the time to research and insert a serviceable source, I see no compelling reason to remove it. --Gene_poole (talk) 06:21, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree we didn't need a quote, but I still think if we are going to have one it should be better than that, so I've found one. Doug Weller (talk) 11:52, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. Thanks for that. --Gene_poole (talk) 12:41, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Unit fractions

The theory that the Pyramids were based on unit fractions of a cicle has been put forward. It is not at all clear that the Ancient Egyptians thought that the earth was spherical at the time, 2630 to 1814 B. C. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.41.51.240 (talk) 13:11, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Missing references. Someone please add these since the page is semi-protected.

I. E. S. Edwards "The Pyramids of Egypt". Pelican, 1947, 1961, 1985. Penguin, 1991, 1993.

Kurt Mendelssohn "The Riddle of the Pyramids". Thames & Hudson, 1974. Sphere Cardinal Edition, 1976.

The first of these is probably *the* reference on the Egyptian pyramids. The second puts forth a theory that I understand has not been generally accepted by the Egyptological community, but notwithstanding that, the book is an excellent description of all the Egyptian pyramids right down to tiny mud brick ones erected in late dynasties. It's important to note that the author was not a crank, even if his theory was not accepted.

These are some very important facts that can help you on many things such as projects and just to reasearch and learn more. 66.183.175.33 (talk) 02:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC) RFW

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Egyptian pyramids/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Hello. I am performing a GA reassessment for this article. I'm afraid the article no longer meets the GA criteria. Here are some suggestions to improve its quality:

Per WP:LEAD, the lead should be about two full paragraphs summarizing the main points of the article.
The article is in sore need of inline citations.
There are several citation needed tags.
"–" dashes go between dates.
The references at the bottom need to be cited with Template:cite web.

I'll give the editors of this article one week to make the changes before I delist the article.

Citation needed tags replaced with citations. - Icewedge (talk) 21:22, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

The seven days are up, and I'm afraid this article still doesn't meet the GA criteria. Work on my suggestions above and feel free to renominate at WP:GAN. This article has been delisted. Nikki311 01:54, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Sphinx reference

{{editsemiprotected}}Needs a link to the wiki article on the Sphinx where references to the Sphinx are made (below the image on the right).

Done —Ms2ger (talk) 11:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Construction techniques

Merge of articles on construction? This article has quite a short, concise and rational section on construction. The Great Pyramid of Giza article has a huge, rambling section on construction (250 words on the pyramid itself, 10x as much on the construction and labour — not all of it 'rational' — in my opinion at least!). I would like to split the article off and merge this (and I think another section I have seen elsewhere). Any suggestions / advice ? Cheers Markh 10:56, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

I intend to work on the article of the Pyramid of Giza. I agree a lot material on it is not very rational, i think, mainly because the believers of alternative theories try to eliminate the "acepted theories" and viceversa. I fear if you merge the two articles, a lot of nonsense may be introduced here. While i think alternative theories (or hypothesis) should be mentioned, we should keep them separated. By the way, english is not my native language, so pelase by patient with me :) Nanahuatzin 07:19, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

I was going to start with the section for this article ;-), then merge the other articles with that! I would save lots of repeated info and allow the other articles to be about the actual objects in question. Markh 12:40, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I think it´s a good place to start. I intend to write more about the contruction techniques and problems (i am enginner and this fascinates me). As soon as i have some time, i will put something about the how they cut the stones, based on the archeological findings. Meanwhile in the article of Giza i want to write more about the structure of the pyramid, and the history of the pyramid after the construction. I will accommodate to the structure of the merged article.

New article now exists Egyptian pyramids construction techniques I have simply copied the section from here and the one in the Khufu article, and they need and introduction and merging. Once this is done, we can have a go at merging with the Great Pyramid of Giza section, and highlight which bits are 'generally accepted' and which are not. I dont actually want to remove any content, just avoid duplication. Any thoughts? Markh

The pyramids are built by ramps. First they built the step pyramids with ramps then they built ramps to the top to make it into a non-step pyramid. They worked from the top down. Its that simple. This can easily be done after the yearly floods, where the clay softens in order for them to shape the blocks. They used sleds and rollers for the dried blocks. --66.81.50.215 (talk) 05:28, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Article Header Description

The third sentence of the articles reads "None were built as tombs for the country's Pharaohs and their consorts during the Old and Middle Kingdom periods.", this confused me at first reading "None were built as tombs for the country's Pharaohs". I know this is me misreading the sentence cause it says "during the Old and Middle Kingdom periods". But still its confusing on first read. Could the sentences not be changed to be a little more to the point (i.e. "None were built during the Old and Middle Kingdom periods."). Does anyone have any negative thoughts about that? Symo85 (talk) 13:03, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

ya wait, huh? this is what the article says, that none were built for the pharoahs during those periods, but those are the periods most famous for pyramids???169.229.75.140 (talk) 03:05, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

There are 138 pyramids discovered in Egypt as of 2008.[1][2] Most were built as tombs for the country's Pharaohs and their consorts during the Old and Middle Kingdom periods.[3][4] [5] The earliest known Egyptian pyramid is the Pyramid of Djoser which was built during the third dynasty. This pyramid and its surrounding complex were designed by the architect Imhotep, and are generally considered to be the world's oldest monumental structures constructed of dressed masonry. The best known Egyptian pyramids are those found at Giza, on the outskirts of Cairo. Several of the Giza pyramids are counted among the largest structures ever built.[6] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.96.165.181 (talk) 02:33, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Mazghuna Section vandalism

The Mazghuna entry states that the pyramid there was '5,ooo' feet high, which would be more than ten times the height of the great pyramid itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.54.32.143 (talk) 01:01, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Well spotted, thanks. I've removed it. Dougweller (talk) 05:51, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Amenhotep?

The article says 'The first historically documented Egyptian pyramid is attributed to the architect Imhotep, who planned what Egyptologists believe to be a tomb for the pharaoh Djoser. Amenhotep is credited with being the first to conceive the notion of stacking mastabas on top of each other' Is Amenhotep another person, if so, who?--Jcvamp (talk) 07:41, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

More pictures

not enough descriptiveness. more pictures and more about the egyptian alphabet.Áỹõ we need to know how the pyramids were lightened up by reflections from the sunlight. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.199.17.44 (talk) 14:27, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Aliens?

I saw it on TV that aliens might have helped make the pyramids it should be mentioned somewhere. xD 70.110.102.225 14:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes I noticed there's a lot of talk about that, if there have been any scholarly pieces discussing the subject then I believe the aliens theory should be included somewhere in the article. I'll see if I can find anything myself. Swimforestswim 08:58, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Aliens, as in, Ethiopians? PLEASE - there is no scientific evidence AT THIS TIME that there is any intelligent life outside of man on the planet Earth. (VERY possible, but to date, no evidence) If and when there is a discovery of such intelligence, wikipedia could address such far-out fringe theories. This whole concept is made out of very thin spaghetti. HammerFilmFan (talk) 17:48, 16 February 2011 (UTC) HammerFilmFan

Electrostatic generators?

The History channel recently aired a documentary on the capacity of the pyramid to generate static electricity via water movement through aquifers beneath the structure, and generating ionized air molecules which moved along corridors within the chambers. The Magnesium-deficient coating of rock over the pyramid helped to store electrostatic charge within the chambers. The net effect may cause ionizing balls of light around the surface of the pyramid, similar to what is seen with 'ball lightening'. The effect may have allowed for the pyramid to have self-luminosity, allowing it to be seen at night...

Does anyone have opinions on this matter to suggest this property of pyramids be added to the pyramid page?

sealpoint33 —Preceding undated comment added 01:57, 15 November 2010 (UTC).

Just more evidence that the History Channel is now pandering to the lowest common denominator. That show talked about aliens also, I believe. It's rubbish and shouldn't be in the article. Dougweller (talk) 07:08, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Agreed - they should change their name - the show is hardly a "History" channel. I commented on an old comment above about "aliens" building the pyramids (garsh, they must have been great linguists to organize and command all those egyptian workers who did the manual labor) - there will always be this sort of looney fringe view, but it has no place in a scholarly reference, even one with as many problems as Wiki. HammerFilmFan (talk) 18:01, 16 February 2011 (UTC) HammerFilmFan

Edit request from 60.240.85.91, 6 April 2011

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Pyramids took as long as 20 years to build

60.240.85.91 (talk) 06:40, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. If you have a reliable source, please change the "yes" in the template above to "no" and add that source here. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:43, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 January 2012

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

egypt is cool

68.111.182.247 (talk) 00:20, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the input--Jac16888 ^Talk 00:28, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 17 March 2012

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Just wanted to add a great reference, incredibly informative with new expert theories as to the purpose of the pyramids. http://www.pyramidcode.com/About.html 71.252.235.58 (talk) 06:26, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

It looks like pretty much just an ad for a TV series. What are you saying it's a source for? Dicklyon (talk) 06:39, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Please reopen the request, asking to change X to Y, and then we can do something for you. As for the link you gave, i agree with the user above, it really just looks like an advert for some TV/DVD series. Please be more specific. Thanks. --andy4789 ★ · (talk? contribs?) 14:01, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 April 2012

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

there are only 118 pyramids in egypt not 138!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

64.180.25.201 (talk) 20:39, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Bility (talk) 21:54, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 14 September 2012

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

There have been 138 pyramids discovered in Egypt as of 2008.[1][2] Most were built as tombs for the country's pharaohs and their consorts during the Old and Middle Kingdom periods.[3][4][5]

The earliest known Egyptian pyramids were found at Saqqara, northwest of Memphis. The earliest among these was the Pyramid of Djoser (constructed 2630 BCE–2611 BCE), which was built during the third dynasty. This pyramid and its surrounding complex were designed by the architect Imhotep, and are generally considered to be the world's oldest monumental structures constructed of dressed masonry.[6]

The estimate of the number of workers to build the pyramids range from a few thousand up to 100,000.[7][8]

The most famous Egyptian pyramids can be found at Giza, on the outskirts of Cairo. Several of the Giza pyramids are counted to be among the largest structures ever built.[9]

85.154.60.214 (talk) 07:50, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. Also, be more specific about what needs to be changed. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 09:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 21 December 2012

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change the picture caption to read "From left to right are the Pyramid of Menkaure, the Pyramid of Khafre and the Great Pyramid of Khufu."

Naming things from right to left is counter-intuitive (at least for English speakers).

86.128.2.66 (talk) 14:06, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Done — Wolfgang42 (talk) 18:01, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

It's a Volcano

The primordial mound that rose from the deep was a volcano, they believe it spit out the Sun. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.167.227.16 (talk) 03:45, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Can you provide a quality, independent reliable source for this view? HiLo48 (talk) 03:58, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Stick to topic

I would suggest cleaning up the article so it contains relevant information. Example, there is no reason to mention the crusades which occurred thousands of years later in an article about the pyramids of Egypt. It's convoluted information like this who's only function is to steer off topic at best or discredit Wikipedia as a legitimate source at worst. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:B:A3C0:7:1937:E42C:1638:A7C8 (talk) 23:35, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Why no discussion of Egyptian pyramids as having 4 sides?

In general, a pyramid could have n sides. E.g. they could have 3 sides, like a tetrahedron. IIRC, Egyptian pyramids have 4 sides, oriented to the compass points. Would expect to see that discussed here, with a citation. ToolmakerSteve (talk) 04:01, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Not Tombs

I think there is a consensus now that these pyramids were not tombs since no body or mummy or anything of the sort was found in the,. I think it is ridiculous to keep claiming that they are tombs when in fact we have no idea what they are. Let's just say, we have no idea what function they served in stead of putting ab out dated theory that they are tombs for Pharaohs! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.108.151.18 (talk) 09:38, 19 July 2011 (UTC) They are tombs Duh!

I would suggest 'monument' in stead of tombs. There is evidence enough to link pyramids to distinct pharao's, their lifes and deaths, but they are not tombs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.160.123.125 (talk) 01:52, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 February 2014

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

thumbnail 98.217.85.248 (talk) 15:26, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 17:13, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Built by Jewish slaves? Section should be cited with credible sources or specifically stated as opinion.

The statement on this article regarding this topic should be backed up by credible sources and references listed, or not mentioned at all. If it is a matter of opinion, it does not belong on the article unless specifically stated as such. 50.10.230.161 (talk) 22:42, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Why isn't this mentioned in the article? WHY isn't this mentioned when it is well-documented and so widely discussed? --205.188.117.14 08:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Because there is no evidence at all to support it ? Markh 11:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Since the myth that Jewish slaves built the pyramids is so pervasive and widely-held, I think there should be some sort of mention discrediting this myth at the beginning of the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.126.49.62 (talk) 22:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC).

The people who built the piramids were neither Jews nor slaves, graves of the workers were found near them and forensic examination proves that they are egyptian. --Armanalp (talk) 16:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Im tired of people spreading myths that were passed down generation after generation, because they are trying to garner sympathy for their cultural group. Agreed, Jews went through alot, but please dont spread lies, it makes you look discredible.

Possible copyright problem

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Diannaa (talk) 22:00, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

But are they really burial sites?

This article badly needs citations. There's no citation in the second paragraph, where it says the pyramids were built as tombs. It's been said for a long time that the pyramids were built as tombs- but as the first paragraph states, most remains have been found elsewhere. I think the article needs at least a couple of citations, telling exactly which pyramids were used as tombs. It's my understanding that both the pyramid named Djoser and the one usually called Khufu never contained bodies. King Tut's tomb was rectangular and found underneath workers' huts from a later period - not in a pyramid (this is my understanding, so I'd like to see citations in an article that states the opposite). I realize people have this notion that the pyramids were tombs (and perhaps some of them are), but I sure would like to see the academic citations (or a citation needed tag at the head of the article). I tried to add one, but I guess I can't, because it's protected. I'd add citations attesting to the opposite set of facts (which pyramids weren't tombs and which pharoahs were buried in regular tombs in the City of the Dead), but I can't do that either. So maybe someone can at lesat add ONE citation stating the name of a pyramid that is also a tomb. Sarcophagi, in general, are found in mastabas.--LeValley 06:09, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

You are aware that all the main pyramids were subject to both grave-robbing during the Egyptian kingdoms, and wholesale theft by officials during the "Greek" and Roman periods, correct? That the bodies (not to mention the valuables) of these structures are virtually all gone is no surprise. HammerFilmFan (talk) 17:56, 16 February 2011 (UTC) HammerFilmFan

So a lack of evidence equals evidence? Tombs have bodies or something that would have suggested a body was once in there; the pyramids do not. 50.11.254.145 (talk) 13:15, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 November 2014

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Egyptian pyramids has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

"of finished stone" and "smooth sides in its finished state" should have "finished" replaced with "dressed" as any stone worked for final use is dressed not finished.66.74.176.59 (talk) 03:00, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Partly done I agree and have made the first change, but the second is referring to the shape - smooth sided, rather than a stepped pyramid - but I have added dressed stone at the end of the sentence - Arjayay (talk) 12:28, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Historical Development: "The second pyramid"

It struck me as really odd to begin a section on the history of pyramids by citing the second known pyramid. What about the first? One would expect it to rate a mention. Should it be "the oldest surviving pyramid and the second historically documented pyramid"? Or is the first documented pyramid somehow not notable? 135.23.85.212 (talk) 22:51, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Numbers Incorrect

At the beginning of the article, it says "There are 138 pyramids discovered in Egypt as of 2008.", yet later in the article it says "As of November 2008, 118 Egyptian pyramids have been identified." One of these is correct and one is wrong. Please fix this issue. EnergySta5 (talk) 22:48, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit suggestion

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I couldn't find credible sources citing exact number. It should noted in the article that the exact number is not known at the moment and there varying (118, 138) estimates. E.g.

"There are 138 pyramids discovered in Egypt as of 2008." -> "There are over hundred pyramids^[1] discovered in Egypt as of 2008"

"As of November 2008, 118 Egyptian pyramids have been identified." -> "As of November 2008, there are sources citing both 118 and 138 as number of identified Egyptian pyramids."

--Cycli (talk) 08:14, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Done -- Sam ^Sing! 10:36, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

References

^ http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/pyramids.htm. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 March 2015

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Egyptian pyramids has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This page is full of spiritualism.

188.2.11.71 (talk) 12:45, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 14:54, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Christopher Dunn

Re this revert, there are two different issues. Regarding Dunn, see his website and a review of the book, noted for fringe claims such as the Giza pyramid was a "power plant" that worked "by responding harmonically with the seismic energy contained within the Earth". Also check out the citation given for the estimate of the number of workers it took to build the pyramids. It is a link to Nat Geo, but there is no such content there. - LuckyLouie (talk) 23:39, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I reverted my revert when I saw that I had mistaken Dunn as the author of the Natl. Geo. piece, and that the latter was templated for failed verification. Dhtwiki (talk) 07:00, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

"Resurrection machine" source is dead

The linked source for the claim that the pyramids were a "resurrection machine" is dead. This claim sounds questionable, as it implies the Egyptian notion of the afterlife is somehow the same as the Judeo-Christian concept of the "resurrection." They are not the same, so perhaps a better source or wording could be provided? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thepibbs (talk • contribs) 18:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

What passage is that exactly? There is no reference after the paragraph found when searching on "resurrection machine"; the nearest reference, number 12 at the moment, has a live URL. Dhtwiki (talk) 23:21, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Apologies, that's my fault. I added the new ref to the wrong paragraph. I've added it where I meant to now, but left it where it was as it is also a reference for " This suggests the pyramid may have been designed to serve as a means to magically launch the deceased pharaoh's soul directly into the abode of the gods." - see the quote in the reference.

Which in turn suggests those two paragraphs may need to be merged in some way. Doug Weller (talk) 07:13, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Murder to protect secret passages?

Was murder used to protect knowledge of the secret passages of burial chambers in Egyptian pyramids? This article says nothing. David Spector (talk) 18:50, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2015

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Egyptian pyramids has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The very first sentence of this article should be removed because it is inaccurate and badly sourced. Someone has added an introductory line to this article that is inaccurate. The line claims the Egyptian pyramids were grain storage facilities and uses Dr. Carson, who is not an expert on Egyptology or grain storage, as the authoritative source. The citation is actually a clip from an MSNBC show where Dr. Carson explains his personal point of view about the pyramids. Dr. Carson is in no way a neutral or authoritative source. That claim is also not in agreement with the world community of anthropologist, historians, and Egyptologist. The rest of the article correctly explains that the pyramids were tombs, so the intro line is misleading in terms of article coherence.

TheresaKH (talk) 17:54, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

This was already reverted as vandalism. You happened to spot it within the 14 minutes it was in the article. Thanks for the note! ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 18:23, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 December 2015

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Egyptian pyramids has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The pyramids of Giza have been suspected to have been the tomb of the Pharaoh's, but in all truth and reality no Pharaoh's body has ever been found or associated with any of the pyramids. No proven written writing describing the ownership of the pyramids have ever been found, except in one spot not in clear view for anyone to see and is questionable to the scientific evidence.

Van Broch

192.234.160.74 (talk) 01:08, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --Stabila711 (talk) 01:18, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Egyptian pyramids. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080609220846/http://news.yahoo.com:80/s/ap/20080606/ap_on_re_mi_ea/egypt_missing_pyramid;_ylt=AtJMeqg4khfjCZgFw4P7z5us0NUE to http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080606/ap_on_re_mi_ea/egypt_missing_pyramid;_ylt=AtJMeqg4khfjCZgFw4P7z5us0NUE

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:25, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Looks good, although I encountered a 302 error at first. Dhtwiki (talk) 21:36, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 December 2016

‹ The template below (Edit semi-protected) is being considered for merging. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

This edit request to Egyptian pyramids has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

King Piye and King Taharqa were not egyptian kings. They were kushite kings. I would recommend this to be corrected. Oaomar (talk) 02:28, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

one of the million sources: https://oi.uchicago.edu/museum-exhibits/nubia/kushite-kingdom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oaomar (talk • contribs) 02:31, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 04:07, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Becky Sayles, did you even read the message before responding? Oamar points out that Pharaohs Piye (reigned 747–721 BC) and Taharqa (reigned 690-664 BC) were also kings of the Kingdom of Kush. We already have the article on the 25th Dynasty, pointing that they were all Kushites.

For some reason, Oaomar thinks that these two Pharaohs should not be described as Egyptians. Dimadick (talk) 12:51, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Pyramid's Purpose

I have just read the article, and I strongly feel that we should add a section to the article explaining the purposes of the pyramids and what they were used for, as they are not explained. Please correct me if I am wrong. York12321 (talk) 18:29, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

New Pyramid Discovered sez Associated Press 2017-04-03

Apr. 3, 2017 6:12 AM ET ^[1]

"...an Egyptian excavation team has discovered the remains of a new pyramid that dates back to the 13th Dynasty, some 3700 years ago.

...believed to have been ancient Egypt's first attempt to build a smooth-sided pyramid."" GreggEdwards (talk) 17:28, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

References

^ [1]

Typo

of the Bent Pyramid at Dahshur The Southern Shining Pyramid

should read

of the Bent Pyramid at Dahshur was The Southern Shining Pyramid Cpaaoi (talk) 15:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I've made the change you suggested. Dhtwiki (talk) 06:12, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Masonry vs. Stone Structures

First sentence is critical IMO and while it might be technically accurate I think it's silly to call the pyramids "Masonry Structures" when they are so clearly 95%+ stone. Masonry is mortar, in case people do not know. No one looks at a brick wall and calls it a "Mortar" wall. "Stone structures" is more accurate and less of a stumbling block. These articles lose legitimacy when the lede is clutzy and clunky like this.66.25.171.16 (talk) 01:03, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Isn't "technically accurate" a core purpose for an Encyclopedia ? - FlightTime (open channel) 12:50, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, and your point is taken. But sometimes being technically accurate is an obstacle, particularly in the the very beginning of the article, i.e. the "lede". I advocate a general relaxation of technical terms and standards in the lede. If "masonry structure" is worth differentiating from "something else", that can be done later in the article.66.25.171.16 (talk) 01:43, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

66.25.171.16: Would, in the first sentence, the phrase "masonry" being changed to "stone" be adequate? Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 17:10, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, but I'd like to wait a bit. It's possible there is a compelling reason to either call it "masonry" or to not call it "stone".

While we're at it, might there also be a better phrase to describe the shape of the Egyptian pyramids than "pyramid-shaped" considering that the name for the geometric shape may derive from the name of these very structures? groupuscule (talk) 17:27, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

I had this exact same thought and am glad you mentioned it. Deconstructed, the article essentially says pyramids are pyramid-shaped, which is kind of dumb. You wouldn't say circles are "circular".66.25.171.16 (talk) 01:43, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Egyptian pyramids. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080511163647/http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/ritter/geog101/textbook/connections/connections_dating_pyramids.html to http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/ritter/geog101/textbook/connections/connections_dating_pyramids.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041205175232/http://www.discoverychannel.co.uk/hiddenhistoryofegypt/feature6.shtml to http://www.discoverychannel.co.uk/hiddenhistoryofegypt/feature6.shtml
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://africa.reuters.com/top/news/usnJOE4AA0H1.html
Corrected formatting/usage for https://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080606/ap_on_re_mi_ea/egypt_missing_pyramid%3B_ylt%3DAtJMeqg4khfjCZgFw4P7z5us0NUE
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.whtour.org/86

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:55, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

[1] ttp://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/pyramids.htm. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

[2] [1]

[1]

[1]

North-to south structure

Text from Egyptian pyramid

Temporary removal

WikiProject: Fact and Reference Check Work is Excellent

How many pyramids?

Were have all the photographs gone?

Vandalism

See Also

See also

Anonamly

Why are there only three?

New Evidence to Suggest the Pyramids were CAST from concrete

Suggestion

Pyramid shape

Fecal balls

Angles

Dates

Reference list

Size of Great Pyramid

Proposed Egyptian copyright law

Vandelism

vandalism....

Stars

Source for opening statements

Unit fractions

Missing references. Someone please add these since the page is semi-protected.

GA Reassessment

Sphinx reference

Construction techniques

Article Header Description

Mazghuna Section vandalism

Amenhotep?

More pictures

Aliens?

Electrostatic generators?

Edit request from 60.240.85.91, 6 April 2011

Edit request on 30 January 2012

Edit request on 17 March 2012

Edit request on 29 April 2012

Edit request on 14 September 2012

Edit request on 21 December 2012

It's a Volcano

Stick to topic

Why no discussion of Egyptian pyramids as having 4 sides?

Not Tombs

Semi-protected edit request on 13 February 2014

Built by Jewish slaves? Section should be cited with credible sources or specifically stated as opinion.

Possible copyright problem

But are they really burial sites?

Semi-protected edit request on 26 November 2014

Historical Development: "The second pyramid"

Numbers Incorrect

Edit suggestion

Semi-protected edit request on 7 March 2015

Christopher Dunn

"Resurrection machine" source is dead

Murder to protect secret passages?

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2015

Semi-protected edit request on 9 December 2015

External links modified

Semi-protected edit request on 20 December 2016

Pyramid's Purpose

New Pyramid Discovered sez Associated Press 2017-04-03

Typo

Masonry vs. Stone Structures

External links modified