User talk:Acnicolov/sandbox

Your comparison was really good. Very interesting. And it does reflect the different philosophies of the two sites. The Smithsonian is more specific, while Wikipedia is broader. It was a cool read. - James.G.Lucas
James, use the four ~ symbols to sign your Talk postings. Libringreen (talk) 23:10, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very Informative

  This was an interesting research piece. I'm given the impression that pairing the Wikipedia and Smithsonian articles would result in a pretty well-balanced knowledge of pyramids. Clearly, you've taken into account the strengths and weaknesses of each article. I had no idea that astrology factored into their construction. The only thing I was left wondering is if either article touched on the misconception that pyramids were built with slave labor. 
  Well done! SarahDoodle (talk