The Egyptians were actually better known for just destroying things not in their name if they did not agree with them (e.g. nearly no trace of Tutankhaten before his discovery, and well... countess destroyed cartouches, etc. etc. etc.); however, just because I have never heard of anyone reconstructing another's work and claiming it as their own does not mean I am correct.
The many renovations of the sphinx were due to the fact that it was basically a big, bulky thing that fell apart somewhat. Granted, it is an ultra-permanent structure compared to most modern constructions, but I am assuming the major reconstruction you mean is of how when it was most recently uncovered in the sand, the body was so eroded from the thousands of years of being buried under the sand.
When I critique a paper, as I find many teachers do (I myself am not a teacher, but have taken great time to understand the workings of that strange breed of human), I will accept any argument as plausible, if not necessarily true if it is backed up by credible evidence. You can't just say, "I think it happened this way because of a personalized guess". Something like, "I believe that this happened because of 'this', 'this' and 'this'." But, argumentative persuasion is not why you're here...
I'm sorry I cannot be of any 'real' help, but I offer what I can. Remember to work hard, and I wish you luck, Ky9!