Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Post-Pyramidion Construction

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 03:15, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Post-Pyramidion Construction

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is entirely based on a web site and a self-published book by the same author at lulu.com. The only mention I can find of "Post-Pyramidion Construction" is the website and the book. Clearly does not meet our criteria for notability. NOTE that I removed most of the text as it was a copyvio from the website. It can still be seen in the history. Please do not restore it. Dougweller (talk) 06:04, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:12, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as non-notable but I love the idea of "building a pyramid from the top down". Sergeant Cribb (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If I read it correctly the topic is the construction of the casing (outer-layer) of the pyramid? That may indeed have been done after placing the pyramidion and then working working your way back down from top to bottom. It is mentioned in Egyptian pyramid construction techniques where there is a reference to Diodorus Siculus mentioning this was how the casing was created. Not sure this is worthy of its own article. A section in a page about pyramid construction might be more appropriate. The title for the article is somewhat badly chosen and the introduction does not explain the topic very well. It's confusing as it does leave the (rather humorous) impression the article is about building pyramids top-down :-) There is mention in the literature of the nature of the construction of the casing of the pyramid. See for instance Zahi A. Hawass, Lyla Pinch Brock, Egyptology at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century: Language, conservation, museology, American Univ in Cairo Press, 2003, pg 175.[1]--AnnekeBart (talk) 12:25, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, probably. If anyone can make more sense of it, it might be possible to merge portions to Egyptian pyramid construction techniques, but I have difficulty understanding what most of the text is trying to say. The first sentence is either written in a very confused way or flatly wrong. The citation to Dieter Arnold's Building in Egypt is particularly strange—that page states that the casing could not have been laid from the top down! (The casing was probably dressed from the top down, but this article doesn't seem to be saying that.) It's just too messy to be preserved. A. Parrot (talk) 17:49, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

* Delete After thinking about it some more (after writing the comment above) and reading the other comments I agree with the deletion. It really is too much to really fix the article. I agree with A. Parrot that "It's just too messy to be preserved." The only way I can see fixing the problem is to rename the article and do a major rewrite that would result in an article that does not have much to do with what's on the page right now. So deletion seems reasonable. --AnnekeBart (talk) 19:37, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.