Talk:Aztec pyramid
Add topic
The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).
It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
The definition is literally "A pyramid built by the Aztecs". Not even Wikipedia has an article on this so it really can't be idiomatic. -- Pedrianaplant (talk) 21:13, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. Wikipedia does have an article on Mesoamerican pyramids, but that phrase isn't idiomatic either. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:27, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
- And yet we do also have an entry for Mesoamerican pyramid, not to mention ancient pyramid, Egyptian pyramid (which survived RFD once), and Mayan pyramid. I'm not convinced any of these are idiomatic. Delete 'em all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:32, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
- I would keep Mesoamerican pyramid and Egyptian pyramid, but improve the definitions to capture their characteristics. If you built two pyramids in the middle of Nebraska, one with straight lines and the other with terraces, a knowledgeable person might say, "I see you built one Egyptian pyramid and one Mesoamerican pyramid". bd2412 T 04:43, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
- Nebraskan pyramids? Nebraska would become famous. But if there's a difference in style, it may be a tentative keep. DonnanZ (talk) 18:10, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
- I am no archeologist but I cannot tell the difference between an Aztec pyramid and a Mayan pyramid. They both look just about the same. I doubt such a difference is reflected in texts and if it is, it would need to be attested as such rather than just meaning "a pyramid built by the Aztecs/Mayans". -- Pedrianaplant (talk) 22:03, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, Mesoamerican pyramids are different from Egyptian pyramids, but I'm sure Mesoamerican pottery, textiles and weapons are also different from their counterparts in Egypt. The fact that two different things are called by the same name doesn't mean that any phrase based on the name that applies to one, but not the other is idiomatic. For instance, a rubber means something completely different to someone from England as opposed to someone from the United States. That doesn't mean we should have an entry for "American rubber" and English rubber".
- Are "American rubber" and "English rubber" attested with these meanings? bd2412 T 02:56, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
- Nebraskan pyramids? Nebraska would become famous. But if there's a difference in style, it may be a tentative keep. DonnanZ (talk) 18:10, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
- Note, I have improved the definition of Mesoamerican pyramid to note that it is "typically a step pyramid with a temple at the top". bd2412 T 16:10, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
- Delete, personally – I never understood why these pyramid terms so famously survived RFD. Am open to being convinced otherwise though. Ƿidsiþ 13:36, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Delete, and ancient pyramid by the same token. --Hekaheka (talk) 09:30, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Deleted, as to Aztec pyramid. I think other variations would require a separate discussion. bd2412 T 18:48, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).
It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
RFDing the pyramids separately, per BD's suggestion. The original discussion was at WT:RFD#Aztec pyramid (to be archived at Talk:Aztec pyramid). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:59, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
This one survived RFD quite a long time ago (Talk:Egyptian pyramid). —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:01, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- Some people don't give up. I don't see any real harm in keeping any of them. DonnanZ (talk) 14:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. These are of course pyramids of distinct regional styles (except the very obviously SOP ancient pyramid), but then again, that doesn't mean they should be included. We don't include Hellenistic bronze, do we? Or Roman mosaic? — Kleio (t · c) 14:35, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- Keep all but ancient which is SoP. The use and basic design is different and requires prior knowledge.--Dmol (talk) 05:41, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
- Indeed -- the kind of knowledge which one would go to an encyclopedia for (like, for example, Wikipedia), not a dictionary. — Kleio (t · c) 00:10, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and KIeio. DCDuring TALK 00:16, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- Keep all but ancient which is SoP. The use and basic design is different and requires prior knowledge.--Dmol (talk) 05:41, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
- Delete all. Ƿidsiþ 12:50, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
- Delete them all per KIeio. The stated rationale for them is poor: "Terms that imply certain social knowledge that could not be derived from any of the constituents, nor from their combination. For instance, an Egyptian pyramid has a different shape to an Aztec pyramid." Well, a Japanese sword has a different design than a Roman sword, but they're still SOP... - -sche (discuss) 08:39, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
- Delete All sub-classes of a noun, they are not individual words. Khu'hamgaba Kitap ᐅᖃᕐᕕᐅᔪᖅ - talk 17:35, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Egyptian pyramid.
- 1947, Leslie V. Grinsell, Egyptian Pyramids
- An Egyptian pyramid may be defined as a sepulchral or religious edifice of stone or brick with a ...
- Delete - I've always felt Egyptian pyramid was SOP (like boiled egg and car door). I created all or most of those other pyramid entries when the original RFD failed since those terms met all the same requirements as Egyptian pyramid — hippietrail (talk) 06:00, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Deleted, as to all. bd2412 T 12:54, 27 June 2017 (UTC)