Talk:Nazca lines

Aliens

I just removed the section about the ancient aliens guy. It was poorly written, contained no sources and is not appropriate in alternative explanations because it is widely discredited. That said, the Nazca Lines have been featured on his show and that would be relevant in an "in pop culture" section--24.91.3.121 (talk) 06:20, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

You are right about it being widely discredited and often that, along with lack of citations, might be enough to delete it. However, Van Daniken has gotten so much coverage over the years that a sentence or two (noting it as a discredited theory) seems better than ignoring it. I have seen other discredited theories mentioned in other articles, presumably for the same or similar reasons. I am not adamant about this but I suggest that if you wish to put it in a different section or rewrite it, that would be better than just deleting it. Donner60 (talk) 06:30, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree that removing the mention of Erich von Daeniken was not a good idea. He's not a scientist, I agree. He is a controversial person, I agree. But his books helped a lot to make the Nazca lines world-known! Many people learnt about the Nazca lines thanks to him -- he popularized them, as well as the work of Maria Reiche. Why delete the mention of von Daeniken, then? Optimiced (talk) 13:06, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

What are the Nazca lines really?

I have pondered what the Nazca lines are and why they are there for almost fifty years and now it seems that the answer is obvious. People have just not viewed it with their thinking caps on. These kinds of lines are found all over the Andean region of South America and until now they have defied the collective imagination of the world as to what they are. The ancient South Americans had a system of writing which consisted of not on strings. They are called quipu. When you take a quipu and lie it out so that radiates from a central point it looks like Nazca lines. The Naszca lines as well as so many other similar geoglyphs in South America are writing. We just now have to figure out what they say. Too bad no one really understands how to read quipu. Brian Johnston http://atlantisincanada.yolasite.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.70.52.59 (talk) 22:13, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Links to GoogleMaps regarding Figures on Nasca lines

I suggest giving external links to googlemaps for Figures listed in the article. A few of pictures has coordinates in their detail pages. It would be better to give the coordinates on the article itself as external links. Fotte (talk) 12:31, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

same image location

The two satellite photos are of the same location (and rotated), one should be removed.

189.188.22.58 (talk) 15:20, 10 December 2014 (UTC) baden k.

Greenpeace Graffiti

I don't know of how to do this, but I assume that the recent flood of coverage about the Lines due to the actions of Greenpeace should be included somewhere. 50.184.230.146 (talk) 21:26, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

It has been, several times. (Sometimes in more than one place on the page!) Don't be afraid to try yourself! --220 of ^Borg 06:47, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Current statement is very prejudicial though and is not actually stated in the source material. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.109.120.185 (talk) 20:52, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

I believe that it has been made wp:NPOV now. For example one edit said damage was permanent, which I doubt is possible to be certain about yet. --220 of ^Borg 06:47, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

I think the red lines in the posted image are misleading. They emphasis the tire tracks, which are months or years old. You can see them in this photo from January 2014. I would delete the image, but considering I work for Greenpeace, some people might see that as improper behavior.