Talk:Machu Picchu

message: Historical note: This mudslide has cut train access to Machu Picchu for the first time in many years of crowded tourist flow through the archeological site and community.  This historical note will currently offer a helpful/useful logistical warning to travelers planning to visit soon.
At some point in time (after repair?) it should be re-phrased in terms of its importance as it affects the history of tourism to the site.
Wikidity (talk) 02:21, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not a travel guide. It is highly unlikely that the mudslide will have any long-term affect on the site at all, and the cutting of the rail route for a few days in irrelevant in terms of Machu Picchu and its history. Regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 08:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

text: This isn't a unique event: The rail line was blocked a few years ago by a rock slide. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 17:26, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mudslide cuts train access 

message: The lead says that Machu Picchu was declared a Peruvian Historical Sanctuary in 1981, but in Machu Picchu#History we find:  This edit added "(page previously mentions 1981?)", so that text needs to be removed, and the date verified. Also, the misguided "325.92" needs to be replaced with "326". A reference would be handy!
Google finds lots of sites supporting 1981, but the sites I have found are not at all reliable, and have probably just copied the text from each other, or from here. I found two sites supporting 1971, but that could easily be a typo which was copied from one site to the other. This example says  The same site says 1981 on its main page. I'm hoping that someone has a book or other suitable reference, and can clean up this point. Johnuniq (talk) 02:00, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  1981 or 1971 

message: An edit that has been removed a couple of times says The song "Kilimanjaro", from the 2010 Tamil Movie "Endhiran", ... was filmed at Macchu Picchu in Peru.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilimanjaro_(song) but it only cites Wikipedia. If it was acttually filmed at M-P it's significant, otherwise it's piffle - but I can't find a good source. Anybody out there know? = DavidWBrooks (talk) 10:52, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Filming at M-P? 

message: I was thinking of removing the new "Twin towns" section (added in these four edits) because it seems trivial, and the flag icon is intrusive. However, looking around shows these are accepted elsewhere (example). Any thoughts? Johnuniq (talk) 01:17, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I added this, and I can see where you are coming from with the Union Flag being intrusive, but as most town sections have twin town sub-sections. The fact that Machu Picchu is uninhabited is irrelevant Haworth has Machu Picchu on it's page, so I believe this page should stay as it is.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zolstijers (talk • contribs) 18:38, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Twin towns 

message: Reference for smallpox infections among the Incans prior to Spanish incursion is: McNeill, W.H. 1976. Plagues & Peoples, p. 183.
Thx, I'm a "newbie to Wiki, & have Anthropology degrees. I am also an experienced editor, & may want to contribute to Wiki.
Lynntas (talk) 20:43, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your contributions! ~  Matthewrbowker  Say hi! 01:43, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Lynntas, 14 February 2011 

message: Is it relevant to mention it in the media section? Pritstick94 (talk) 19:58, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so. The current items are somewhat dubious but at least have reasonable notability and relevance to the topic of the article. I do not know the song, but to warrant mention here a song would need to be do a lot more than mention the topic. Johnuniq (talk) 23:26, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Is the son actually about Machu Picchu, or does it just use the name as a metaphor? - DavidWBrooks (talk) 00:01, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strokes song 'Machu Picchu' 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:80 - Machu Picchu - Juin 2009 - edit.2.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on June 18, 2011. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2011-06-18. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng  {chat} 16:37, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:80 - Machu Picchu - Juin 2009 - edit.2.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon 

message: Don't know how relevant this may be, but "Raiders of the Lost Ark" was based on the movie "Secret of the Incas" (1954) with Charlton Heston.  They even ripped off Charlton Heston's costume for Harrison Ford's (fedora, leather jacket, tote bag, pistol, khaki, etc).  209.77.229.154 (talk) 09:46, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't seem relevant to this article - it's not like "Raiders" was filmed at MP, or even references it. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:12, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Raiders of the Lost Ark" Based on "Secret of the Incas" 

message: This article is a bit biased and reads in many places like a travel brochure. It makes it seem as if the building techniques at Machu Picchu were somehow revolutionary or new.
The fact is that the buildings of Machu Picchu were built in a manner remarkably similar to many buildings which predate it by over two thousand years. For example, the building techniques used in Mycenae, which had been built 2600 years before Machu Picchu, are remarkably the same .Sidney Toy A history of fortification from 3000 B.C. to A.D. 1700 Heinemann, 1955, Page 156-157. ; David J. Brown How they were built Barnes & Noble, 1996, Page 102; M. Don SchornElder Gods of Antiquity: First Journal of the Ancient OnesOzark Mountain Publishing, 2008, Page 243; David J. Brown Greece: the magic spring Harper & Row, 1970, Page 18.
Here is a photo comparing the lion gate at Mycenae with a doorway at Macchu Picchu:
	This the lion gate at Mycenae, built built around 1250 B.C
I tried adding this to the article but the important information was removed by DavidWBrooks with the comment "What does Greek architecture have to do with MP? That seems a really unnecessary parallel.." I am leaving the information here for discussion as to whether it should be included or not.KoshkaCoon (talk) 18:05, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the chances that the Inca knew anything about Greek artchitecture are very slim, this interesting material needs (IMHO, of course) to be added as a separate section pointing out that the apparently coincidenctal parallel exists - I reverted it because it was placed in the article in such a way as to imply that MP was at least partly inspired by Mycenae or its equivalent. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 00:34, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Addition of such would need to be supported by reliable sources (scholarly works, not popular press stuff) noting the significance of the observed parallels. Vsmith (talk) 00:53, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

text: In general, it is not appropriate to add commentary to an article unless the source specifically comments on the topic of the article. Even if that is satisfied, it is not necessarily helpful to note, for example, all building techniques that are similar to those mentioned in this article. It is not as if someone is claiming (at least not in this article I hope) that the Incas were the only people to ever build in this style, so a reason would be needed to add this observation, despite its interest. Also, there are only so many ways of assembling stone blocks, so perhaps the similarity between the photos is not particularly significant (a source would be needed to clarify that). Johnuniq (talk) 01:18, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ashlar Masonry was not invented by Incas 

message: Would it be acceptable to mention the literal "rock face" in the article? (Look carefully at the photos.) 142.167.187.130 (talk) 02:44, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Only if it is part of the local lore (I've never heard it mentioned). Thanks to paredolia, every place with rocks has at least one "face". - DavidWBrooks (talk) 12:39, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The face? 

message: The Spanish pronunciation given is wrong. My father is from Peru and he has always, consistently, pronounced it as [matʃu piktʃu].  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.107.238.239 (talk) 15:48, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct. Without the "k", Picchu means something different. I will change it. Dger (talk) 15:57, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: Someone review & correct the following:
"The Incan people started building the "estate" around 14000BC..."
14000 BC?? Later it says 1450 (AD!).  Check the following link for more accurate information: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/274 86.47.181.194 (talk) 11:06, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, that's just recent test edits which I reverted. Johnuniq (talk) 11:28, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Creation Date - Correction Required 

message: Makes me wonder - what if a university from Peru went to Connecticut, grabbed a bunch of artifacts concerning colonial America, and took them back to be put on display in Peru for several decades?
What would be the reaction of Yale University to that?
Just wondering.
--Atikokan (talk) 05:25, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yale controversy 

message: I seen who This page was last modified on 13 July 2013 and in 25 July 2013.but in now in View history tab,i cant see those in dates list !!!
is it a problem?or Wiki not show all modified date?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nelson1942 (talk • contribs) 19:18, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  a problem in date 

message: Because so much has been written in so many places about Machu Picchu, this article has to limit "external links" to sites with unique information. That's why I have removed a travel blog added by an Anonymous IP ... it's a very good blog, well-written and researched, but it doesn't add enough important, unique information. Our readers should know that if they follow an external link from this article, it will add something new and difficult to find otherwise. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 13:24, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  travel blog 

message: The photograph in the Early Encounters section it titled "Man sitting on ruins" and is dated 1911.  The photograph depicts a mule in the background.  Although I don't know the location of the photograph I think it is unlikely that the ruins pictured are of Machu Picchu as no mules were taken up to Machu Picchu in 1911.  
If the picture is not of Machu Picchu I think it should be removed from the article.
Ian3060 (talk) 21:27, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photograph in the Early encounters section 

message: The whole hydropower project "threat" seems remarkably POV. It is taken as fact that this project will somehow have a negative effect on the site, but no details are given as to who is saying this. The specific "threat" is fairly vague in the text, but the closest thing I see to a threat in there is that the powerplant may be disruptive to an alternate access route and some nearby hot springs, both of which sound like tourist destinations rather than the site itself.
Although this entry looks well-cited because it had 3 citations in 2 paragraphs, but two of these are just travel sites describing the geography of the area and have nothing to do with the power plant. The only remaining site is a terse headline-only site entirely in Spanish that says the project is occurring. If this section is to remain in the article, it should 1.) be better cited and 2.) be more balanced, explaining who is saying it's a threat, why they think that and what the opposition things. As it is now, this reads like advocacy. Personally, I'm in favor of culling the whole section. For now I've marked it as neutrality disputed. 0x0077BE (talk) 19:29, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, seems like the section hasn't had any defenders come forth so I went ahead and culled it. 0x0077BE [talk/contrib] 22:30, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hydropower project threat? 

message: I've removed the paragraph about L Ron Hubbard as that bit of info may fit in his biography or the religion article, but is rather irrelevant here. Vsmith (talk) 11:32, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Human Sacrifice, Aliens and Mysticism section 

message: There are a few passages, particularly in the "History" section, which require many more citations. If anyone could cite the claims in this section, it would be appreciated.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrFish291 (talk • contribs) 19:01, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for additional citiations 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:99 - Machu Picchu - Juin 2009.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on July 6, 2014. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2014-07-06. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:46, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:99 - Machu Picchu - Juin 2009.jpg]]

message: Hi All, just a heads up that the units in the description of the hydropower system in Threats are probably faulty. I'd fix them, but the relevant source is in Spanish and behind a paywall. The problem is that we're quoting 105 cubic metres of water, but I think we need a unit of volume per time, presumably cubic metres per second. 105 cubic metres per second seems like the right order of magnitude for a 280MW plant, but I can't see the article to check. Thanks, 118.208.175.89 (talk) 22:36, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I had actually meant to cull that whole section months ago, but I guess I missed the second paragraph. I finished the job now.  0x0077BE [talk/contrib] 15:41, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hydropower unit troubles 

message: On the section of the page entitled "In Media", there is a picture of two men to the right side of the page. One is Esteban Paveletich. You've misspelled his name, leaving off the "h" at the end. When clicking his name, it takes you to a page saying no page exists. However, if you do a search under the correct spelling of his name, with the "h" at the end, you'll see he has a Wikipedia page. Please correct. 
75.185.139.187 (talk) 19:27, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 3 September 2014 

message: The 'History' section seems to contradict 'Early encounters', 'Demystifying the discovery of Machu Picchu' and 'Cultural artifacts: Dispute between Peru and Yale University'.
'History' says that 'Hiram Bingham' (re)discovered Machu Pichhu, while 'Early encounters' comments that 'Maps found by historians show references to Machu Picchu as early as 1874.' Again, while 'History' says that 'The ruins were mostly covered with vegetation except for the cleared agricultural terraces and clearings used by the farmers as vegetable gardens … Bingham was not able to get a full extent of the site … ', while 'Demystifying' says that 'Hiram had claimed that all the ruins of Machu Picchu were covered in a dense vegetation. Contrarily, the photographs depict the ruins in a clear open space. The letters and photographs suggest that Machu Picchu was not isolated in wilderness, but rather connected and populated by several indigenous families.' 
A more subjective (and possibly controversial) discrepancy is observed between paragraph 12 of 'History' and 'Cultural artifacts: Dispute between Peru and Yale University'. 'History' takes a clearly Imperialist position on the tensions between the explorers and the local people, and the Yale – Peru dispute which followed. In contrast,'Cultural artifacts' has a markedly revisionist tone.
In conclusion, 'History' seems to have been written first, from the traditional viewpoint, while the following sections appear to have been added later, reflecting a more contemporary outlook.
While it is certainly necessary to give both sides of the argument, would it not be better to move all of this into 'Cultural disputes', under two subheadings, one for each side? 
By the way, could somebody please find a better title for this section? Thank You. Jose Mathew C (talk) 14:29, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: A small problem

message: Would be interesting, if anybody knows, to say what type of rock (other than "local") was used in the construction.  98.170.192.214 (talk) 05:40, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Building material 

message: IMHO, this article has too many redundant photos, including several similar panoramas. This is a not uncommmon issue with articles about famous places - many editors have their favorite photo(s), often ones they have taken - and as I've found in other articles as well as a disagreement here, different editors think different photos are unnecessary. In that case the default becomes to leave them all in, and the article gets hard to read, especially on mobile devices (which is why this matters). 
Personally, I'd kill the middle panorama, which is mostly redundant, and the top photo with mist. 
Anybody else have an opinion? - DavidWBrooks (talk) 20:25, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely. I think I stripped out a whole bunch a few years back, but they seem to breed. We should only keep photos that serve to illustrate the article, not overwhelm it with pretty pictures. If people want to see lots of pretty pics, they can go to Commons. The aim of Wikipedia is to educate. Simon Burchell (talk) 21:35, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos 

message: The article on Machu Picchu as written does not mystify Bingham’s rediscovery of Machu Picchu.  The section “Demystifying the discovery” refers to Bingham’s “glorified” discovery.  This is certainly the case that Bingham, who was good at telling the story, did embellish and exaggerate in later years, especially in his book “Lost City of the Incas”.   At the time of his exploration of Machu Picchu he was more scholarly and factual in his writing.  It is primarily in his book “Lost City of the Incas” written many years latter that he used a more elaborate style. Hugh Thomson, who provided the introduction to the edition of the book published by Weiderfield and Nicolson in 2002, highlights the elaboration of Bingham’s style of writing. Thomson also refers to Alfred Bingham’s article.
If the facts of his exploration are presented in this article using his writing and records at the time, rather than relying on his book “Lost City of the Incas”, then there is no exaggeration to explain.  Therefore there is no need to demystify: "hazardous tropical jungle", "most inaccessible path in the Andes", "isolated in wilderness".
Alfred Bingham had access to “the voluminous files of Hiram’s Yale Peruvian expedition at the Yale library and the thousands of his photographs preserved at the National Geographic Society.”  I don’t have access to these, but from what I have researched I don’t totally agree with Alfred’s assertion that: “It was not hidden in the jungle but largely exposed by local farmers who had cleared the ruins to grow crops.” 
and 
“The most misleading impression given by my father’s accounts was that the ruins were all but hidden in the dense vegetation.  Photographs he took on that first day but never published tell a different story. From the highest point in the ruins he took a series of pictures giving a panoramic view of the site to the east and south. It shows that a large part of the city had been cleared by the Indian families: they had removed the overgrowth from the terraces on which the buildings stood in order to obtain level land for corn and other crops. The trunks of felled trees lay where they had fallen on top of many of the buildings, but few of the ruins were hidden.”
The April 1913 volume of the National Geographic Magazine has many photographs that show the site before the major clearing was undertaken.   These include Page 499 overview of the western side and the Sacred Plaza taken by H.L. Tucker in 1911, and Page 432 of the west side after 10 days of clearing in 1912. The photograph on page 433 is a repeat of the shot on page 432 but after the vegetation was removed.  The terraces and building that could not be seen in the photograph of page 432 are now clearly visible.
Going back to Hiram’s description of what he saw on his first visit was cleared agricultural terraces with buildings covered in vegetation.  The agricultural terraces had been cleared by a couple of farmers a few years earlier so they could grow crops, but they were unable to remove the large tree trunks.  There were so few farmers that they would not want the effort or see the necessity to clear the vegetation from all the buildings.  I don’t think the Quechua families “had removed the overgrowth from the terraces on which the buildings stood” but from the agricultural terraces.  These terraces were built to allow level ground for growing crops and which the Incas had filled with rich soil imported from elsewhere.  The terraces that had been made to provide level ground for buildings were not suitable for agriculture and hence would not have been cleared.
The final point about not initially valuing his findings at Machu Picchu is correct.  He was looking for the old Inca capital of Vitcos and none of the clues fitted, so he was correct in assuming that he had not found Vitcos.  He later returned his attention on Machu Picchu as he appreciated the well preserved nature of the ruins because they had been left undisturbed since the time the city was abandoned. As Bingham failed to identify the ruins at Espiritu Pampa as Vilcabamba Viejo, he erroneously theorized that Machu Picchu was Vilcabamba Viejo.
For the above reasons the section “Demystifying the discovery” is out of context, confusing and not totally factually correct and I propose that it be deleted from the Machu Picchu article. A revised version may better fit on the Hiram Bingham page.
Ian3060 (talk) 06:13, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demystifying the discovery 

message: 40% of the opening paragraph is about the pronunciation and etymology of Machu Picchu. Reading it is like wading through treacle. Consider moving the etymology into a footnote per WP:LEADCLUTTER. Firebrace (talk) 20:21, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not just a footnote, but trimming it and moving the tymology elsewhere would be a good idea.- DavidWBrooks (talk) 22:24, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening paragraph 

message: im hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking youim hacking you  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.67.88.125 (talk) 17:33, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 5 May 2017 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Machu Picchu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.sacredland.org/world_sites_pages/M_Picchu.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101208190623/http://entertainment.oneindia.in/tamil/exclusive/2010/endhiran-machu-pichu-111010.html to http://entertainment.oneindia.in/tamil/exclusive/2010/endhiran-machu-pichu-111010.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:33, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Machu Picchu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160207033208/http://caminoincatrail.com/galeria/index.html to http://www.caminoincatrail.com/galeria/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130312211652/http://globalheritagefund.org/onthewire/blog/emergency_measures_to_protect_machu_picchu to http://globalheritagefund.org/onthewire/blog/emergency_measures_to_protect_machu_picchu
*Added  tag to http://www.wrightpaleo.com/pdf/MP%20East%20Flank%20Report%20Pt%201%20Cover.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.wrightpaleo.com/pdf/MP%20East%20Flank%20Report%20Pt%202%20Text.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.wrightpaleo.com/pdf/MP%20East%20Flank%20Report%20Pt%203%20Drawings.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:01, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is it appropriate to add the daily life of the people who lived there? Is it any different than normal life in the Inca Empire? How did they live? It was mentioned that it was an estate of Pachacuti, so did they all work for Pachacuti? What did they grow and eat? How many people even lived there? These things may also be important for the subject of Machu Picchu. Enniks (talk) 22:02, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Daily Life of Machu Picchu 

message: Additions of subsections Daily Life of Machu Picchu as  Royal Estate and Agriculture to Machu Picchu History Section and reorganization and update of information within the History Section
Enniks and Sesxb7 are adding in new sub sections under the History section. We are editing the first paragraph to remove dead links to sources. We are adding in two subsections with information about the Daily Life of Machu Picchu as a Royal Estate and Agriculture. We are moving the rest of the information that was after the first paragraph of History and before the First Expedition subsection into it's own section called Encounters. Enniks (talk) 16:13, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  May 2017 

message: The internet poll of the New Seven Wonders of the World did not have a source so I found one and inserted it.Enniks (talk) 16:33, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition of a source for an internet poll in the Introduction section of Machu Picchu 

message: Improved sentence structure and grammar of the content. Also added more links for users. Also added a picture of a llama at the ruins of Machu Picchu. Enniks (talk) 16:38, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvement of grammar and clarity of the Daily Life as a Royal Estate section 

message: Added a picture of the terraces to go along with the paragraph about terrace farming. Also linked several other articles including Incan agriculture, irrigation in Peru, and Incan engineers for the paragraph on Kenneth Wright. Sesxb7 (talk) 17:27, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvement of agriculture section 

message: Fixed the sentence structure of the paragraphs in the agriculture section because they were confusing. Sesxb7 (talk) 17:28, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvement of paragraph structure in agriculture section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Machu Picchu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140222235652/http://www.peruthisweek.com/news-peru-german-tourist-dies-while-trekking-inca-trail-101838 to http://www.peruthisweek.com/news-peru-german-tourist-dies-while-trekking-inca-trail-101838
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:25, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: hi, amaranth or quinoa is south american and has eatable seeds. could it be part off the inca diet?? spinach is the same family. then the leaves AND the seeds might be eaten.
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amaranth
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleome_serrulata
85.149.83.125 (talk) 23:49, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  amaranth 

message: The Quechua dictionary cited says pikchu. s. Pirámide. Sólido puntiagudo de varias caras. || Cono. Ch'utu. I don't understand much Spanish, but the claimed translation  "peak; mountain or prominence with a broad base that ends in sharp peaks" is apparently completely made up or at best inaccurate.--Espoo (talk) 17:46, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  meaning of pikchu 

message: See https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/1913/04/machu-picchu-peru-inca-hiram-bingham-discovery/?cmpid=org=ngp::mc=crm-email::src=ngp::cmp=editorial::add=Compass_20191116&rid=D3C472AF93F8A8BCEE95284AEEFA77AA
View slideshow on that web page AND the full 1913 article.
Machu Picchu, situated along the eastern side of the Andes, was rediscovered in 1911 and a National Geographic Society sponsored expedition returned the following year. In this edition we have the original story written by the expedition leader, Hiram Bingham, from the April 1913 issue.
THE LOST CITY OF THE INCAS: MACHU PICCHU
This city, probably built by the Incas 2,000 years ago, was uncovered and excavated by Prof. Hiram Bingham, under the auspices of the National Geographic Society and Yale University. Its beauty of situation and the mystery of its past make it one of the most interesting groups of ancient buildings in the world.''
Peter K Burian (talk) 16:54, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Machu Picchu in Hiram Bingham's era, full 1913 text and photos 

message: I have removed a couple of redundant references to the two English pronunciations. Footnotes are a mild obstacle to easy reading; we don't need to link multiple dictionaries for the same factoid. As it is, having four different pronunciations, with (still) eight footnoted references, makes the intro to this article hard to read. As WP:Pronunciation says, "Pronunciation should be indicated sparingly, as parenthetical information disturbs the normal flow of the text and introduces clutter" - DavidWBrooks (talk) 20:22, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: The climate chart placed  in section 4.8, which references source 65, displays average temperatures which are absurdly inaccurate as compared to datasets from SENAMHI (The Peruvian meteorological and hydrological national agency or bureau  ) automated weather station located mostly south of the citadel proper, and west of the Belmond Sanctuary Lodge, and at an elevation of 2,399 meters ASL.  January temperature ranges at this station were between about 26 and 11 degrees centigrade for the years 2019 and 2020, with an average low of about 12 degrees Celsius.  I was only able to find tabulated data sets with hourly temperature readings.
Below is the weather station listing from SENAMHI, as well as a link if anyone is interested.
MACHUPICCHU (distrito)
Provincia : URUBAMBA
Departamento : CUSCO
Estación : MACHUPICCHU
Altitud : 2399 m.s.n.m.
Latitud : -13.16655
Longitud : -72.54585
Station code: 472897F0
https://www.senamhi.gob.pe/servicios/?p=estaciones  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.128.157.98 (talk) 23:47, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Significant Temperature Discrepancies  

message: So, what we know
Machu Picchu was unknown before 1911.
It was still being built into the 1970's.
Everything else in conjecture.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blade Breaksdown (talk • contribs) 16:14, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Please have a read of our requirement for reliable sourcing. Do you have any for your claims? HiLo48 (talk) 00:27, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Read it properly 

message: Perhaps consider (description of following) for inclusion in Motion Pictures?
Machu Picchu… It's kinda the end of my rainbow, you know… It's mysterious and exotic, a place you just get lost.  -Curtis Vaughn (Ryan Reynolds), in Mississippi Grind.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmstearn (talk • contribs) 08:09, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference in Mississippi Grind 

message: In light of this article from NPR, do we change the name to Huayna Picchu? Hires an editor (talk) 18:55, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No, since Machu Picchu remains the accepted name. If that changes over time, the article can change. It's worth mentioning somewhere in the article. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 19:29, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Huayna Picchu 

message: Should this article be renamed in light of recent research? https://www.npr.org/2022/03/27/1089088061/machu-picchu-huayna-wrong-name Yinwang888 (talk) 03:15, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:COMMONAME. (CC) Tbhotch™ 03:22, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

text: Note that the claim has been mentioned in the story, with a reference. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 11:51, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change? 

message: The area lies at the intersection of two faults and the city itself is built on a graben. The fractures provided copious amounts of granitic rock easy to work. This should be incorporated in the text; see https://www.gondwanatalks.com/l/machu-picchu-en/ Hedley Finger Hfinger 22:01, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geology 

message: — Assignment last updated by Joshrieck (talk) 20:15, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Architectural History

message: Machu picchu 103.232.131.19 (talk) 15:16, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urdu 

message: I have modified this section as the evidence about Incan human sacrifice is pretty minimal, anyway if I am wrong feel free to change it. 5.168.150.210 (talk) 23:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The information was properly sourced, I have restored it. Captainllama (talk) 23:44, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modified section about human sacrifices and mysticism