Talk:Ama Dablam: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:28, 24 March 2010

Mountains Start‑class High‑importance

	Mountains portal This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Elevation

The Peakware site shows elevation at 6,856 metres as does one of my maps and Google search shows many sites as well using 6,856. Another map of mine shows the elevation at 6,812 metres as well as [1]. I also found a document from the Nepal government [2] that consistently used 6,812 m throughout. I therefore chose 6,812 metres as the official height of Ama Dablam. RedWolf 05:17, May 9, 2004 (UTC)

That's simply not good enough. Wikipedia's method of figuring altitudes for mountains is highly bias, using speculation of one source over another. There's obviously disagreement on the altitudes of most mounains, especially in the Himalaya, and if Wikipedia is to live up to its "quality standards" it should provide non-bias information of however many altitudes are suggested for a mountain. I'm editing this article to support such. --Bentonia School 06:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How was I being biased when I based the 6812 figure on two sources (map and Nepali govt)? In any case, I agree that the mountains in the Himalaya are especially prone to having incorrect elevations due to discrepencies in various sources. RedWolf 16:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Irish-American ascent

It is still not clear to me how this recent addition is a particularly notable ascent. Was it a new route? Was it noted as particularly important in a reliable source? -- Spireguy (talk) 02:28, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 :*How was I being biased when I based the 6812 figure on two sources (map and Nepali govt)? In any case, I agree that the mountains in the Himalaya are especially prone to having incorrect elevations due to discrepencies in various sources. [[User:RedWolf|RedWolf]] 16:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
+== Irish-American ascent ==
+It is still not clear to me how this recent addition is a particularly notable ascent. Was it a new route? Was it noted as particularly important in a [[WP:RS|reliable source]]? -- [[User:Spireguy|Spireguy]] ([[User talk:Spireguy|talk]]) 02:28, 24 March 2010 (UTC)