Talk:Mesoamerican architecture

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mesoamerica, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.MesoamericaWikipedia:WikiProject MesoamericaTemplate:WikiProject MesoamericaMesoamerica articles

Architecture Top‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mexico Low‑importance

	Mexico portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mexico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Picture of mortar at Teotihuacan edit

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I may be wrong, don't have any references to hand and haven't visited Teotihuacan for some years now, but weren't the small stones placed in the cement to show areas of modern reconstruction? Simon Burchell (talk) 17:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Although some of the cemented areas are modenr reconstruction I don't think the ones in the picture are. It's worth checking though.·Maunus·ƛ· 17:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

James O'Kon and arch 'superiority' edit

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

"

However, recent work by engineer James O'Kon suggests the Mesoamerican "arch" is technically not a corbelled arch at all but a trapezium truss system. Moreover, unlike a corbelled arch, it does not rely on overlapping layers of blocks but cast-in-place concrete often supported by timber thrust beams. Computer analysis reveals this to be structurally superior to a curved arch

"

I have serious doubts on the validity of this source and its author. I've looked at what appears to be O'Kon's main website and it doesn't set right with me in terms of scientific neutrality. He seems more like a zealot than anything inexplicably fanatically opposing (what I don't think he realizes are) outdated views and I can't find any kind of peer reviewing on his work, other than a blogger who has his doubts on his books in general but mostly rails on O'Kon's odd opposition to pre-WWII archaeological thinking.

I'm not an engineer so I can't refute the veracity of his structural claim, but I'd prefer if someone with actual knowledge of this subject would speak up and try to confirm this. TangoFett (talk) 09:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Add topic