This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Architecture 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 ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Engineering This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering 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.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Iran This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I undid the changes that started to go into torture and seemed a bit like vandalism. The person who added those changes was not signed in and didn't leave any sort of real citations that made their changes make any sense. With the whole torture overtone and no citations, it made the whole article seem like a joke or a prank or something. Kelidimari (talk) 16:57, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

in the section on critique, it says that some architects view super adobe as regressive, but there is only evidence given for one singular architect having given this critique.

I tagged this article as being in need of cleanup. Parts of the article are written in the second-person, and give instructions to the reader. Wikipedia is not a how-to guide.

In places, the tone of the article seems to advocate in favor of this technique. I removed a few problematic statements (E.g. "Unfortunately the government removed the houses...") as promoting a point-of-view, but problems remain. The aritcle should be re-written to have a neutral, encyclopedic tone.

I left in place the tag asking for in-line citations. I note that this tag has been on the article for one year now, but most sections still do not have in-line citations. This makes it difficult for the reader to tell which statements here are backed up by sources, and which statements are not. Johntex\^talk 16:28, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I refer to the numerous references to torture etc. I'm no authority on the subject, its just that some bits of text scream "vandalism" when I read them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.196.105.16 (talk) 00:45, 21 February 2012 (UTC) It does seem really weird. Why would the housing be a form of torture, when the "wetness" of the housing can be prevented by putting the adobe stuff into water-proof bags? I don't get it... This seems weird. 192.33.240.95 (talk) 16:53, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"superadobe" is what Nader Khalili termed his technique of using moistened adobe soil in polypropylene tubes to build (usually domed) permanent structures. So really superadobe is just a popular type of earthbag construction (specifically flexible form rammed earth, or modular contained earth, whatever else you might want to call it). In my opinion, the topic of superadboe is too closely interwoven with the concept of earthbag construction in general that these articles should just be combined under the heading "earthbag construction". Matthew Ferguson (talk) 15:59, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]