Talk:Ashlar
Add topic | Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rubble Masonry
[edit]Shouldn't "whereas masonry using irregularly shaped stones is known as rubble masonry" qualify as Cyclopean masonry terms-wise ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.14.207.82 (talk) 11:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- All of these terms being unfamiliar to me, I consulted the Cyclopean article, which seems quite different from what is described here. 205.197.242.189 (talk) 07:05, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- It appears to me that ashlar is the finest/most particular grade of stone work, Cyclopean masonry somewhere below it, and rubble masonry somewhere below that. Rubble masonry may include stones that are round, very irregularly shaped, and/or of wildly varying sizes. TooManyFingers (talk) 18:08, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Copy
[edit] | Text or other creative content from this version of Ashlar was copied or moved into Palacio de Aldama with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Quadrilateral?
[edit]The image "Ashlar polygonal masonry in Cuzco, Peru" seems to contradict the sentence "Ashlar is related but distinct from other stone masonry that is finely dressed but not quadrilateral, such as curvilinear and polygonal masonry" in the lead, not being quadrilateral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nø (talk • contribs) 09:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:45, 4 July 2022 (UTC)