Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Climbing/Archive 1

Archive 1

Bi-monthly focus article

The Bi-monthly focus article is suppose to change twice in one month right, Horsepens 40 has been their almost four times the implied time?

Plus the current article (Horsepens 40) selected seems kind of regional, it could be a bigger draw than I know. I was wondering if the goal is to get all the members of this project working on an article, might be better to select articles that more editors would have experience with and/or might be higher interest/traffic pages. Granted stubs or articles needing grammar/structural change probably are nominations that anyone could improve relatively easily. WikipedianYknOK 07:28, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I got a little lazy.

Anyway, Horsepens 40 is one of the largest bouldering sites on the U.S. east coast, definitely the largest in the southeast U.S., so it's a little more than regional. It's basically the Joshua Tree for those of us on the East Coast. ⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 08:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

category

We need a category for "Climbing Routes" and one for "Bouldering routes" to fit into the category tree system.⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 02:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

See our new ad:

Climbing organisations

We need a generic Climbing clubs (organisations?) article to pull together what such a club is, and to list those with articles already. A summary of this article could then be used to replace the lists of climbing organisations that are in some of the climbing articles i.e Ice climbing. If I can find a reference for a suitable opening paragraph I'll start a stub. Kevin 00:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Kevin, I've just made the article Climbing clubs but as yourself I couldn't find any references for the lead section. Nk.sheridan   Talk 22:32, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Rock and Ice climbing club at AfD

Just a note to inform members that the Rock and Ice climbing club is currently up for deletion, see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rock and Ice climbing club. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:00, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Climbing portal

Come check out the Climbing portal I started. It still needs a lot of work as of now, so any help would be appreciated. Any suggestions could go here or on its talk page, but I would rather you be bold! Jkasd 02:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Tags

Looks like this is a quiet project - have found lots of category pages un tagged - and some issues seem to be a year or so old - so simply trying to make climbing catgeories link in with the project - hope someone is still active - it looks good on the better articles - cheers SatuSuro 04:12, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Wilderness Diarrhea Getting Killed

Dunno how active this page is, but it seems remotely possible you'd be interested in this. Wilderness Diarrhea is getting merged into Travelers Diarrhea by a couple of zealots who seem to have no concept of outdoor interests.

I get around a lot in the outdoors and rarely treat water, but WD had some good stuff in in it

After a couple of weeks of calm discussion, I went ballistic and no longer want to participate. Rational voices might help.

Calamitybrook (talk) 02:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Info box template for rock climbing routes

I would like to make a "info box template" for rock climbing routes. I think it would be worth while to add WP pages about routes that are particularly famous and historic. In no way should WP try to be rockclimbing.com, moutainproject.com, or summitpost.org. But the especially historic routes like those in the 50 classic climbs deserve a page if every Simpson's episode deserves a page. I might try to start this soon but if anyone starts one before me let me know and I'll help out.--OMCV (talk) 19:12, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I made a template for a "rock climbing route" "info box". Check it out, Template:Infobox rock climbing route. I think suggestions would be best left at the talk page for Template:Infobox rock climbing route/doc; or if you know what your are doing with template just jump in and do some editing. The documentation descriptions needs some help and maybe the coordinate interface. I don't know how to go between deg-decimals and deg-min-sec notation nor how to make the coordinate section robust. Any help would be appreciated.--OMCV (talk) 04:11, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Would it make sense to move this to Template:Infobox climbing route and make it a bit more general? If we're going to create articles for the fifty classics, which is a great goal, not all of them are rock routes. Jfire (talk) 20:16, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree completely and moved the template. Change it any way you like. Glad to hear someone else thinks its a good idea to put a page up for each of the 50 and others routes of similar significance.--OMCV (talk) 04:24, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Messed up mark-up.

For anyone who knows the wiki mark-up better then me there is an error WP:WikiProject Climbing that is messing with the headers. This is what the table of contents (and headers) looks like on my browser. Any help would be great. I'll through up an example of the climbing route template once things are fixed.--OMCV (talk) 05:44, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

1 ?UNIQf4ba90052c1aa84-h-0--QINU? Guidelines

• 1.1 ?UNIQf4ba90052c1aa84-h-1--QINU?Personalities and people
• 1.2 ?UNIQf4ba90052c1aa84-h-2--QINU?Mountains

Should be fixed now. Merry Christmas, Jfire (talk) 20:13, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

The bouldering article looks like it was vandalized

I put the questionable text on the Talk page. I didn't change anything because I'm brand new to Wikipedia. Butternutt12 (talk) 08:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

It's fixed now. Read my note on the Bouldering talk page for the full response. Thanks again :) -Clueless (talk) 11:54, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

David A. Sowles Memorial Award

We should consider making sure that we have an article/stub for every recipient of the David A. Sowles Memorial Award - https://americanalpineclub.org/award/5 . (I will be contributing minimally if at all to this myself.) -- 201.37.230.43 (talk) 00:43, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I think such articles would be deleted if the recipient is only notable for receiving that particular award. The current article on the award looks fine to me. In fact, the award article should probably be merged with the club article.Jarhed (talk) 23:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Need a new infobox

We need an infobox for individual climbers. There is a mocked-up one on this climber's page: Michael_Reardon_(climber), but there needs to be a standard one like the one for mountains. It should be similiar to the one used on musical artists, like this one: Ricky Nelson. There is some talk on the project page about a "climbing" infobox. I can't imagine what such a box should apply to. After we have the infobox, we should start implementing it on climber pages.Jarhed (talk) 23:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Climbing portal

I see that someone started a climbing portal back in 2006. It was deleted by an administrator, but only because nobody fixed it. I would be glad to try to start a new one if we need it. I think it should be the "Mountaineering and Climbing" portal.Jarhed (talk) 23:05, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Standardized formatting for route names

I was wondering if there was an agreed upon format for the title of climbing routes. I've seen them formatted a number of different ways, for example from Jim Bridwell:

• 1974 Freestone"", Geek Towers, Yosemite Falls, Yosemite, CA, USA <<-- Typo perhaps. All italicized.
• 1978 Zenith, Half Dome, Yosemite, CA, USA with Kim Schmitz <<-- Route italicized.
• 1979 Southeast Ridge of Cerro Torre, Patagonia, Argentina with Steven Brewer (first alpine-style ascent of the peak) <<-- Route and peak italicized, notable information in parentheses

I would think only the route name should be italicized, and it should be capitalized as well, but what about ridges and faces named after compass directions? Are those proper nouns, or adjectives modifying the peak name? I would capitalize "North Slope, Alaska", but I would not capitalize "northern slope of Alaska". In the above examples, see "Southeast Ridge of Cerro Torre". Any climbers out there with an iron-grip on grammar? If we come to a consensus, maybe we can put it on the WikiProject Climbing page, as a future reference? --BlueCanoe (talk) 20:20, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Clean climbing

Somewhat credible arguments have been made (and for the moment laid to rest) for deleting this article. In the main, I disagreed.

I've been doing work on it lately and would be gratified if other editors commented and/or made further improvements. Now a bit weak on citations, both in number and mechanical method of their inclusion. Calamitybrook (talk) 02:00, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Are there enough articles on this subject to justify an Outline of climbing?

Here's a discussion about subject development you might find interesting.

The Transhumanist 23:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Grade (climbing) page in need of an experienced climber's knowledge.

After trying to figure out the difficulty of a small mountain I climbed in the Andes, one of the pages that I have noticed that needs some work is Grade (climbing), in particular with respect to grading mountains. There should probably be a main article for this topic too (bouldering has a grade article). I'm not knowledgeable enough to do it but I'd certainly wikiedit the article into good shape after the base has been written. In general, from my perusing of articles, it seems like the climbing articles on Wikipedia are disproportionately poor compared to other hobbies, especially in light of how popular climbing is. I guess climbers don't like using computers and would prefer to be outdoors! Jason Quinn (talk) 16:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Looks okay to me, actually. Maybe you could comment more specifically on it's talk page. Calamitybrook (talk) 16:50, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

You are right. I should have complimented by post with a section at the talk page. It's now there. Jason Quinn (talk) 16:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I suspect you are right. The hardcore climbers I know couldn't give a flip about wikipedia.Jarhed (talk) 02:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Climbing Terminology

I really think we should have a climbing terminology page. One such page exists currently at the 'bouldering' page, but the info there isn't specific to bouldering. In fact, the language used there can be found throughout climbing articles on the site. I think we should have a tag at the beginning of climbing articles that says 'This article uses climbing terminology.' I think we should have a similar tag for grades. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.137.88.205 (talk) 08:08, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Climbing History of Huntington Ravine

Not sure where to mention this to troll for editors....

But I wish the existing article regarding Huntington Ravine, N.H., became much longer and more detailed & with its history of Alpinism.

Would like more good sources.

Calamitybrook (talk) 22:34, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Solicting project help to improve List of climbers

I recently remove a PROD on this article as I believe it meets WP:list. I also expanded the lead and added this project to the talk page. This article still needs a bit of improvement and a rename (IMHO). I have added the rename suggestion: List of climbers, alpinists and mountaineers. Additionally, the lead paragraph should be strengthened with clearer inclusion criteria. There are some suggestions for that from other editors on the talk page. I would suggest the first order of business is to clearly state what the inclusion criteria are in climbing or mountaineering terms so as to leave no doubt about who can be included in the list. Once that is done, it would merely be the task of validating individual entries against the inclusion criteria. Otherwise, this is a good list. As I am not remotely familar with mountaineering, maybe someone from this project can take these tasks on. Thanks.--Mike Cline (talk) 14:33, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Seven Summits

The template {{Seven Summits}} seems to fluctuate every few months, and veer away from the article Seven Summits in peaks listed, whenever someone from some part of the world decides that some peak is not one of the 7 or if there's more than 7 peaks listed it should be paired down, or on the definition of Australia or Europe or utility of Oceania...

I've just made it match up with the article. 76.66.195.196 (talk) 08:32, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Outline of climbing

There is no Outline of climbing.

To create one, click on the redlink above and add this line:

{{subst:BLT|climbing|Climbing}}

Then press save and start adding relevant subheadings and links.

For the whole set of outlines on Wikipedia, see Portal:Contents/Outlines.

For a relevant discussion see: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds/archive 40#What do you think about making an Outline of Birds?

Here's the outline they created: Outline of birds.

The Transhumanist 19:27, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Sports outlines currently under development include:

• Outline of basketball
• Outline of tennis
• Outline of motorcycles and motorcycling
• Outline of running
• Outline of cricket

Can you beat the other Sports WikiProjects to completion?

For the whole set of outlines on Wikipedia, see Portal:Contents/Outlines.

Here are some examples of developed outlines:

• Outline of cell biology
• Outline of meteorology (weather)
• Outline of Iceland
• Outline of Japan
• Outline of anarchism
• Outline of chocolate

The Transhumanist 23:37, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jacob's Ladder (ropes course)

The article Jacob's Ladder (ropes course) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for reference did not find support for this article as written, fails WP:V and WP:N

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 16:25, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Portal:Mountains

Hi. I recently created Portal:Mountains for the WikiProject Mountains which contains a lot of climbing-related links. However I didn't realise there was a WP:WikiProject Climbing as well! Feel free to maintain and enhance it as desired. --Bermicourt (talk) 16:13, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Template:Infobox mountain hut

I have also just created Template:Infobox mountain hut. I'm still working on it, but it's a start. Grateful for any advice especially how to get the coord function to work for a variety of inputs including the standard German Wiki layout of {{Coordinate|50|29|34|N|12|43|11|E}}. I also want to create a "pivot table" template to be able to lift the German infobox into English Wiki and have it point to this one with the minimum of effort which will greatly speed the rate of transfer of information. I'm also happy to tweak it to cater for other mountain huts outside the Alps if that's wanted. --Bermicourt (talk) 16:11, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Portaledge slated for deletion, request contribution

I'm not sure if anyone has noticed, but portaledge has been slated for deletion (due to notability?). I'm not too familiar with climbing and don't know any notable climbing sources, so I thought this group would like to contribute and prevent its deletion. Cheers. -Temporal User (Talk) 10:57, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

• Deletion talk page

Your opinions and advice

A recently discussion Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Women's Sport. Your opinions and your advice are welcome. --Geneviève (talk) 17:55, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archived & Redesign

I have archived all the talk messages from April 2007 to now. I have also completely redesigned the entire project page. Happy Editing! Cj005257 (talk) 18:33, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Articles on famous Climbing areas

I think we are lacking articles on climbing areas. Something like Climbing in Yosemite Valley or any other (notable) climbing area. We could use a infobox with area information similar to info In Rock'n'road book and could be the layer between general articles like Yosemite Valley and articles on specific routes like The Nose (El Capitan).--Jarekt (talk) 16:28, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I'd definitely read these, & might contribute, if I could throw off a particular psycho stalker/ administrator. One could crib from a few guidebooks.

Calamitybrook (talk) 16:49, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

help

I just created a stubbish article on William Putnam (alpinist) who was 1970s president of Amer. Alpine Club, & etc., & but I can't get ref tag to work. The sole source presently is UIAA Web site & is probably useless to footnote each sentence with the same information. Calamitybrook (talk) 22:21, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

naming discussion at Xixabangma

There is a naming discussion at talk:Xixabangma. There is a new poll to determine support for the move from Shishapangma to Xixabangma. If you are interested, please provide your opinion here.--Wikimedes (talk) 00:17, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Looking for Info

I've got a display I'm working on, and I'm trying to find some info about the history of Loggers' High Climbing gear...belts, spurs and all. How they have changed over the years and so on. Any idea's about where I could get some information?

70.103.102.131 (talk) 22:39, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Format for route names -- authority please

I've done some editing on Tahquitz Peak and deleted the italics for route names. (Substituted quote marks.) So tell me please, what is the authority for using italics when naming routes? I see a discussion from 2009 that only had one comment and no conclusion, let alone a WP:RS for using italics. As WP:ITALIC does not address the question, can any Project members give assistance? (This Talk can explore and then the Project can submit its' recommendation to the Manual of Style guideline pages.) I await. --S. Rich (talk) 03:47, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Notability of Alpine huts

Are all Alpine huts "notable" or is there a guideline that indicates which ones qualify? Several Alpine hut articles have been tagged as needing to prove notability, even some with references and sources/bibliographies, others are stubs yet to be expanded. So I'm confused as to where the line is being drawn. See: Gaudeamus Hut, Fritz Pflaum Hut, Franz Senn Hut, Anton Karg Haus etc. If they're not generally notable, I'll stop translating the articles from German Wikipedia as I'm just wasting my time. --Bermicourt (talk) 17:54, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

From WP:GNG: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article". Follow the link to read wiki-definitions of some of the terms in that quote. Cheers. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 19:37, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Notabilty of climbers

Does summiting Everest confer notability? Or, possibly, being a member of the first team from ones country to do so? See Bayarsaikhan Luvsandorj Mongol. PamD 16:33, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Frozen waterfall

I think this page should be created, it's very important for ice climbing (see in this book for example: [1]) There is also a related commons category Commons:Category:Frozen waterfalls. Cya. --Rotpunkt (talk) 12:36, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Lynn Hill

I've started working on improving this article - please come help! I would like to get it to GA or FA over the holidays! Wadewitz (talk) 19:59, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

File:Arthur evans portrait.jpg

File:Arthur evans portrait.jpg has been tagged for speedy deletion -- 76.65.128.43 (talk) 07:27, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Climber heights

Any objections to adding fields to Template:Infobox climber for the climber's height (and possibly weight)? Most physical sports already include this information in the infoboxes of their articles. JMiall₰ 21:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

I went ahead and added height and weight to the template fields. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 19:15, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Lynn Hill photos

If anyone has any photos of Lynn Hill climbing, please upload them to Commons! Or, if you know someone who has some, please encourage them to upload a photo or two! The article really needs more photos of her climbing and it is hard to come by freely licensed photos. Thanks! Wadewitz (talk) 23:17, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Navigation template

{{Climbing-nav}}

Based off {{Rock climbing}}, but it's a nav box to be placed at the end of an article instead of a sidebar. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 20:58, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Category merge proposal

It has been proposed to merge Category:Alpinism with Category:Mountaineering. Your inputs welcome. Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_March_25#Category:Alpinism. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 15:07, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Former member of the DAV Sektion Bayern - Helmutt (prob Helmuth) Raithel

G'day, just wondering if there is anyone here that might be able to confirm (or has a German climbing contact who could confirm) whether the "Helmutt Raithel" that did the first ascent of Mount Russell (Alaska) in 1962 is the same fellow as Helmuth Raithel. Looks like he might be (he would have been aged 55 in 1962), but I'd really need a reliable source (even a primary one such as a membership list) to be able to use it in the bio article. Any help gratefully appreciated! Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 08:38, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Definition of a notable ascent

If you have ever looked at Timeline of climbing Mount Everest you will know that it is a mess with no distinction between notable ascents from a mountaineering POV (ie. difficulty, due to route or method) and various national or other categories of ascent (first person from Freedonia, first person carrying a waterlemon, etc.) I think it would be good if people interested in mountaineering could agree on what consitutes a notable ascent (preferably with pointers to external references to support this) so that articles about mountaineering could take a consistent approach. My own definition of notability would be

• first to do a particular route which is harder than previous routes
• as above + dispensing with some aid (e.g. without oxygen, no pitons, no camps, soloing)
• fastest to do a route
• all of the above applied to women distinct from men

First ascents based on other criteria (nationality and other arbitrary criteria that either don't affect difficulty or don't make sense from a mountaineering perspective, eg. adding a handicap rather than removing a crutch - first person to hop to the summit is questionable whilst first person to solo it is notable) I would list separately in a trivia or non-notable section.

Opinions anyone? Samatarou (talk) 21:50, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

First person from [country] isn't notable by itself. There was a recent AfD about that; I can't try to find it if you want. Otherwise, I think it's a judgement call that we should reserve to what's reported in reliable sources. If they say that it is notable, then it is, otherwise, nope. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 13:08, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Climbing grades

There's a discussion at Talk:Lynn Hill#Grades about converting grades within articles that could use more input from WikiProject Climbing members. Cheers, -Nathan Johnson (talk) 13:08, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Doubts about Template:Climbing sidebar and Template:Climbing navbox

I have opened a discussion here. I think these navboxes need to be specialized. Otherwise, as I wrote in discussion, these navboxes are always incomplete (and so, POV). In it.wiki we use a wlink to a specialized portal at bottom page. If en.wiki is different it's better to write specialized navboxes, instead of putting together: Climbers and Deaths on eight-thousanders, Edmund Hillary and Chris Sharma, Swiss Alpine Club and International Federation of Sport Climbing, Mixed Climbing and Speed climbing. --Rotpunkt (talk) 16:58, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

List of notable climbs

Many biographical articles on climbers have a list of notable climbs. For instance, see Lynn Hill#Notable ascents for what it looks like on WikiProject Climbing's only Featured Article. For Hill, I think that there are definitely climbs worth noting: The Nose and Vandals among them. But, for me, these lists are too long, sourcing is generally poor, and usually the contents of the lists are indiscriminate. I welcome others opinions on how to deal with lists of notable climbs. Thanks. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 17:18, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

First of all I want to make a complete analysis of the situation. Let's see which rock climbers (mountain climbers in a second time) have a section "Notable climbs" or "Notable ascents". I start with american rock climbers, then I will add other categories, and comment it:

--Rotpunkt (talk) 18:33, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Rotpunkt, thank you for making that list. However, you misunderstand me. I'm not saying that lists of notable ascents should not be in biographical articles. I'm trying to help determine what makes a climb notable such that it should be included in an encyclopedia article on a person. The fact that a lot of climbers have lists of notable ascents does not mean we should be adding them. See Wikipedia:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 18:49, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

As I said before, I have still to comment the list, just a second. --Rotpunkt (talk) 18:55, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

My comments:

• first of all having a list of "Notable climbs" is something intrinsic with rock climbing, like an actor has a filmography (Al pacino#Filmography) and a writer has a bibliography (Stephen King bibliography)
• from the origins, the curricula of a rock climber has always involved a list of his major ascents (Jean Marc Boivin, Angela Eiter). Why? Because for a climber his ascents are the only things that represent him. A climber may have had an adventurous life that you can describe in the article, but in the end what counts are the mountains he has climbed or routes he has free climbed
• mantaining a list of "notable climbs" is so intrinsic with climbing and bouldering that today there are websites specialized in doing this work, like 8a.nu, or 27crags.com, not only for best climber, but for everyone

Now the problem is: which ascents are elegible to be used inside the articles? let's see:

• we have to use the ascents based on secondary reliable sources (see WP:PRIMARYTOPIC). There are various websites that represents famous climbing magazines (like desnivel.com, climbing.com, grimper.com, rockandice.com) but also portals (like ukclimbing.com, planetmountain.com, kairn.com) that are well know all over the world (there are editors-in-chief and articles are signed) and climbing paper magazines (I have bought tons of them) and books. On these sites/magazines/books the most important ascents are usually reported.
• then, if these (previous) ascent lists are too big we must put only the hardest grades, that is for sport climbing:
  • male rock climbers of the present day: after-work => only harder than 9a (5.14d), on-sight => only harder than 8c (5.14b) (1 grade below the male highest grade: 9b afterwork, and 9a onsight)
  • female rock climbers of the present day: after-work => only harder than 8c (5.14b), on-sight => only harder than 8b (5.13d) (1 grade below the female highest grade: 9a afterwork, and 8c onsight)
  • male boulderers of the present day: only harder than 8C (V15) (1/2 grade below the male highest grade: 8C+)
  • female boulderers of the present day: only harder than 8A (V11) (1 grade below the female highest grade: 8B)

Obviously for previous years we need to reduce the grades (only half a grade):

• male rock climbers of the late 1990s and 2000s: after-work => only harder than 8c+ (5.14c), on-sight => only harder than 8b+ (5.14a)
• female rock climbers of the late 1990s and 2000s: after-work => only harder than 8b+ (5.14a), on-sight => only harder than 8a+ (5.13c)

This restriction only counts when ascents list is too big (e.g. > 30 ascents) and we want to reduce it. If the list is small and is reported on various secondary reliable sources we can put all of the ascents. --Rotpunkt (talk) 19:45, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Let's make an example. Daniel Woods has recorded 471 boulders from 8A to 8C (http://27crags.com/climbers/dawoods89/ascents). Before Nathan removal ([2]) I had inserted only his 13 hardest ones (8C), that are reported on multiple magazine and websites. BTW Woods has won 7 times the American Bouldering Series (U.S. National Championships in bouldering): http://www.climbing.com/news/woods-puccio-reigning-champions-at-abs-14/). --Rotpunkt (talk) 20:05, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I think you meant Wikipedia:PRIMARY not WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. I agree that we need to use reliable, secondary sources. But just because a reliable, secondary source reports something doesn't mean we have to copy it. We have editorial discretion in what we print. I further agree that the notability of a particular climber is directly related to the climbs xe has done. Your analogy falls apart when comparing climbers to actors though. In an actors filmography, every part they have participated in gets listed. If you want to list every climb that, for instance, Daniel Woods has every climbed in his life, the list would be so long as to be useless. So, the question I posed was what criteria should we use.

The criteria you propose above is original research and thus we cannot do that. As far as I can tell, you simply pulled a number from thin air because you thought that climbs above that grade are inherently notable. This is textbook original research. Further, not every first ascent is notable. Neither is every climb above a certain grade.

I would ask that we keep this discussion about the criteria as related to every climbing biography. If you have specifics about an individual climber, post on that talk page. But since you brought it up, why are those 13 particular boulder problems the most notable? They are certainly the hardest, but difficulty is not the same as notability. As far as I can tell, the choice of those particular ascents was simply because you liked them. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 21:48, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I liked them? These 13 ascents are Daniel Woods "Notable ascents" because are the most diffficult ones. These ascents are "notable" like all the other "Notable ascents" sections I have listed for other climbers in the previous paragraph. Difficulty in climbing (and mountaineering) IS (99% of times) notability. All the history of climbing and mountaineering is about progression of highest grades. My proposal has nothing to do with WP:original research, it's just WP:COMMONSENSE. It could have been an original research if I had choosen 6 of his 13 hardest climbs, but I have choosen all his 13 climbs, so how could it be an original research? --Rotpunkt (talk) 22:36, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

You criteria above is original research. I do not think I can explain it to you if you don't already understand. Perhaps you could ask someone else. Perhaps someone who speaks your native language. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 20:41, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

You started the discussion saying "I welcome others opinions on how to deal with lists of notable climbs." I proposed two rules:

1. we only list ascents that are reported on reliable sources
2. only if these lists become too long, we can reduce the ascents reporting only the hardest ones.

For me is WP:COMMONSENSE, but you think is original research. I think we can just wait for other opinions.

But there is another topic I want to talk about. I don't understand if you make a difference between a list of ascents and a section that describe these ascents. I mean, if I replace the bullet list of ascents with a detailed description (with sources) of these ascents, now is it ok? --Rotpunkt (talk) 22:07, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

From WP:COMMONSENSE: "Citing concrete policies and guidelines is likely to be more effective than simply citing 'common sense' and leaving it at that." Your criteria above on the selection of which climbs to include is an "analysis... of published material that serves to advance a position not advanced by the [individual] sources"; from WP:OR. You are attempting to synthesize that climber X has completed Y climbs at Z difficulty and thus climber X is inherently better than climbers W (who do not have Y climbs at Z difficulty). -Nathan Johnson (talk) 00:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Can we reset this discussion? Probably I didn't understood well your initial doubts. Let's start again. You said: "For me, these lists are too long, sourcing is generally poor, and usually the contents of the lists are indiscriminate. I welcome others opinions on how to deal with lists of notable climbs." There are different issues: long, poor sourcing, indiscriminate content.

• poor sourcing: this is easy, if an ascent is unsourced we can find a reliable source or remove it
• long: if all the ascents are important and well sourced what can we do?
• indiscriminate content: I don't understand this point, can you explain better? --Rotpunkt (talk) 01:00, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

• A few notes; I don't want to get into this too deep.

1. Proposing a criterion for selecting what's notable and what's not (what's worth including and what's not) is not original research.
2. Listing a person's hardest climbs is not a good criterion; a decent criterion establishes a standard accepted (or reasonable) throughout the field. The hardest climb in the world is notable, my hardest climb is not.
3. "if all the ascents are important"--they can't all be zingers. Again, "important" needs a criterion, and Nathan is not incorrect in insisting on that. That's the kind of thing that needs to be proposed here. First ascent, first ascent by a woman, first ascent by a paraplegic, first rotpunkt, first blaupunkt, first one with a bungee cord for a rope, whatever. And then you'll quickly find that the list will get shorter, and that's not a bad thing.

   So, one more time. There is nothing wrong with proposing a list. You could even propose these articles have lists that contain a climber's five hardest climbs, but I for one wouldn't agree with that. To put it another way, not everyone who has climbed Everest is automatically notable just because they climbed Everest. It's still a difficult (and expensive) thing to do, but it's not that notable anymore. By the same token, the first person to do a certain climb makes that a notable ascent. By the time number two and three come along, it's not such a big deal anymore. And to automatically list everyone's hardest climbs--well, when you write me up you'll have to include my 5c, though I'd have to buy a website that states it (all I have is a photo). That's my opinion on all of this; I'd be interested in hearing what maybe someone from a different sports project has to say about this. Drmies (talk) 03:55, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

• I have to do a step back: the topic "notable ascents" is generic and too big for having just one criteria. As I said before I was talking only about "rock climbing" (I said Let's see which rock climbers, mountain climbers in a second time) and inside rock climbing only about "sport climbing" and "bouldering" (I said that is for sport climbing, male boulderers of the present day, ... and so on).

It's impossible to give the same criteria to:

• mountain climbers
• summitters of eight-thousounders
• pioeeners in mountaineering
• pioeeners in rock climbing
• trad climbers
• sport climbers
• boulderers

I was only talking about the last two classes. Examples: the first winter ascent is important for some hard route on mountain and for eight-thousounders, but is nothing for sport climbing and bouldering. When a sport climber repeat Action Directe (climb) all the climbing world talk about it (just google "gelmanov action directe", and this is the 16th ascent). Instead the 5th ascent of a hard mountain route is not reported. And so on. I think we have to distinguish between mountaineering and rock climbing, and inside rock climbing sport climbing and bouldering are a bit different. However, at the end, for me we can easily solve the problems of "Notable ascent" without any criterias. Let's take here the problematic articles: we just check the existence of multiple reliable sources I am sure we can solve them all. The problem with first one with a bungee cord for a rope is just that is a news reported on newspapers instead of climbing/mountaineering books or technical websites, and so we can remove it at all. --Rotpunkt (talk) 09:22, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree with pretty much everything Drmies said above. Regarding your comment "we can easily solve the problems of "Notable ascent" without any criterias", in US legalese, this would be considered arbitrary and capricious. This is bad for both writers and readers. You comment "just that is a news reported on newspapers instead of climbing/mountaineering books or technical websites, and so we can remove it at all" is just all sorts of wrong. The English Wikipedia does not discount reliable, secondary sources simply because you don't like them. A mainstream newspaper reporting on climbing is most assuredly a reliable, secondary source and in almost all cases would be a better source for a mainstream encyclopedia than a climbing book and especially a technical website. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 16:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

1. I said that we could check the existence of multiple reliable sources. Could we try? I have reported a complete list of "Rock climbers" with notable ascents , could you point me the problems? I am sure we can solve them or at least I will better understand which are the main problems for you.
2. Regarding your "is just all sorts of wrong", what about Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources#Context_matters ? (Also written here: Use sources that directly support the material presented in an article and are appropriate to the claims made. The appropriateness of any source depends on the context.) --Rotpunkt (talk) 16:45, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Are you asking for help in interpreting the English language guidelines or are you using hypothetical questions as a rhetorical style? If the former, I would be glad to help. If the latter, which I suspect, I would say that I've got a much better understanding of English language Wikipedia policy than you, and that it appears that you are searching through policy and finding bits that support your views without an understanding of the overarching reasons for that particular statement in policy. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 18:16, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Could you explain which is my error in interpreting this guideline? On it.wiki we have the same guideline and so I know it. But you say I am wrong so explain it to me. --Rotpunkt (talk) 18:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I have a better idea. How about you read WP:IRS. Read the whole thing. Then read it again. Then ask yourself, what's wrong with the statement "the problem with first one with a bungee cord for a rope is just that is a news reported on newspapers". If you don't see the problem, then I question your WP:COMPETENCE to contribute to the English encyclopedia. I simply don't have the time or patience to teach you English. -Nathan Johnson (talk) 01:20, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

The appropriateness of any source depends on the context means that the most appropriate sources for climbing and mountaineering are the ones written by the experts of these topics. --Rotpunkt (talk) 04:00, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Make a correction?

I stumbled across this today and believe it's a joke. I can't find any reference to a "Wei-Tu Hai" deceased on Mt. Everest in December, 2013. List_of_people_who_died_climbing_Mount_Everest I'm not comfortable editing on Wikipedia but the name isn't particularly respectful to those that passed there. Would someone please edit it? Lambofgoth (talk) 02:03, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

I removed it. Thanks. 67.176.62.45 (talk) 20:50, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Fanny Bullock Workman

I've been working on improving this article, if anyone wants to drop by and help! Wadewitz (talk) 23:57, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Great job, thank you very much for all your work! Akseli9 (talk) 12:56, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

@User:Wadewitz: Very nice. Thanks. :) 67.176.62.45 (talk) 20:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Cason Crane

Hello, climbers. This old Afc submission is about to be deleted as a stale draft. Is this a notable climber, and should the article be kept? —Anne Delong (talk) 01:47, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Am Buachaille

Hi. I happened across the article on Am Buachaille we have the other day and tried to reference it up a bit. It appears to be a notable sea stack climb as far as I can tell. I was unable, however, to find any real agreement on the stack's height - other than it seems to range between about 50 metres and 73 metres. As noted on the article talk page, I opted for a mid point of 65 metres for now. I wondered if anyone with access to the right sort of literature would have anything more clear cut in terms of the height of the darned thing? Blue Square Thing (talk) 14:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jamie Clarke (adventurer)

Dear climbers: This Afc submission was improved with the addition of many references, but then never resubmitted to be added to the encyclopedia. Is this an appropriate article for a climber? Should the article be kept? —Anne Delong (talk) 03:14, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Steph Davis

In my continuing series of articles on women climbers, I've decided to work on Steph Davis next - any help would be appreciated! Thanks! Wadewitz (talk) 22:17, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Conflict with MOS

 Discussion ongoing: Pointer to a discussion is related to this wikiproject.
I've opened a discussion at WT:MOS#Italicization of climbing routes, about this project's proposed rule to italicize route names (at WP:WikiProject Climbing/Article recommendations, but generally ignored by the actual articles in Category:Climbing routes).  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ⚞(^Ʌⱷ҅̆_⚲͜ⱷ^{^})≼  06:51, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

southern route: Everest Camp I, Everest Camp II. Everest Camp III, Everest Camp IV

Camps I,II,III,IV are frequently found in the news, along with Everest Base Camp, so these should probably get articles, since they usually are set up in relatively the same positions every year, and everyone uses the same camps on the same route, instead of building their own camps on their own routes. These are more or less "villages" in and of themselves, with some details that don't change much year-to-year. What do you think? At any rate, if these aren't articles, then an article on the Southern Route should be created, detailing the standard stops on the route, and redirecting to that article. -- 65.94.171.206 (talk) 02:51, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Malavath Purna

Malavath Purna is the youngest female to reach the peak of Mount Everest at only 13 and has been covered in mass media. Her article could use some attention. --Amethyst1234 (talk) 21:01, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Matterhorn 150th anniversary

...at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mountains#Matterhorn 150th anniversary. ZachG (Talk) 17:22, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

2013 Nanga Parbat tourist shooting

We have an article called 2013 Nanga Parbat tourist shooting, which is about a mass killing of a party of mountain climbers. To me, the name of that article seems odd, because I don't think of serious mountain climbers as "tourists". But I don't know what alternative name to propose. Can someone suggest one? —BarrelProof (talk) 10:01, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Shilla (6132m) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Shilla (6132m) to be moved to Shilla. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 20:16, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Timeline of climbing Mount Everest listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Timeline of climbing Mount Everest to be moved to Timeline of Mount Everest expeditions. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 15:59, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Timeline of climbing Mount Everest listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Timeline of climbing Mount Everest to be moved to Timeline of Mount Everest expeditions. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 04:44, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Women in Red online editathon on sports

		Welcome to Women in Red's May 2017 worldwide online editathon. Participation is welcome in any language.
		"Sports"

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 12:15, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

RFC on sports notability

An RFC has recently been started regarding a potential change to the notability guidelines for sportspeople. Please join in the conversation. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 23:08, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at NSPORTS

Hello all. In an effort to finally resolve the never-ending and annoying GNG v SSG issue, I've proposed a revision of the NSPORTS introduction. You are all invited to take part in the discussion. Thank you. Jack | ^{talk page} 06:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Risks of lead climbing

I've added some more to the risks section of lead climbing. Can we please have some more eyes on this? -- The Anome (talk) 23:00, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background

On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   10:54, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Sourcing for Highest unclimbed mountain

There's currently a discussion at Talk:Highest unclimbed mountain about the suitability or otherwise of a source for the top twenty list of unclimbed peaks. Knowledgeable comments would be welcome. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:50, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Everest Base Camp listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Everest Base Camp to be moved to Everest Base Camps. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 06:16, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Andy Nisbet (1953-2019)

I've just started a new page on the respected Scottish winter mountaineer and guidebook writer, Andy Nisbet, who was killed earlier this week whilst developing a new winter climb. There's a wonderfully detailed biography about him here should anyone feel like contributing to the page's content. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:14, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

The Portal is getting deleted again

If you guys could comment on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Climbing (2nd nomination), that would be great. Hecato (talk) 07:00, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation rough draft by Boldklub-PJs

-? All I have found so far is only implicitly (not explicitly) rock-climbing.
Is there to be a 'climbing' disambiguation among the widely differing variety of human climbing activities: sport/traditional rock/mountain climbing, rescue/cave/tree/rope climbing, fitness/therapeutic step climbing, and commercial/residential/OSHA ladder/step climbing safety?
(I have no insight into social/political/economic climbing which might be equally deserving of expansion.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boldklub-PJs (talk • contribs) 03:23, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Note: I have moved this from the Project front-page to the discussion. Hecato (talk) 11:28, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Please kindly revise rock climbing biography project Draft:Chris Craggs

Hi guys, your help to assess/improve climbing biography project Draft:Chris Craggs will be greatly appreciated.Neuralia (talk) 18:21, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Robert K. Brinton (mountaineer)

Hello - My father, Robert K. Brinton, was an early climber in southern California and made a number of first ascents in the 1930s. My sister and I are in the process of trying to get an article approved on his climbing and ski mountaineering exploits in southern California (Tahquitz), the Whitney area, as well as the Bugaboos, Zion, and the Devil's Lake area of Wisconsin. I'm told that you might be able to help expedite approval of this page. I realize there is a conflict of interest since the article pertains to my father but we have made every effort to carefully document what we have written with neutral, verifiable sources. We also have access to some quite interesting photos from the era (which we have not yet uploaded) as my father was an accomplished photographer and documented both the climbs and his fellow climbers (Glen Dawson was a close friend and climbing buddy). Please let me know if there is any interest on the part of your project in what we have written. Thanks in advance. Donna Dmbrinton (talk) 20:34, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Rebecca Stephens (climber) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Rebecca Stephens (climber) to be moved to Rebecca Stephens. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 13:51, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Kim Ja-in listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Kim Ja-in to be moved to Jain Kim. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 14:05, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

FAR notice

I have nominated Mount St. Helens for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 04:09, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello, Please note that Mixed climbing, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 29 March 2021 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

Missing list articles?

We have List of people who died climbing Mount Everest. I suggest that lists of people who died climbing less "fashionable" mountains, such as K2, Annapurna, Eiger and Matterhorn might also have encyclopedic value. See also pl:Tatrzański Cmentarz Symboliczny, a memorial to climbers associated with the Tatras who died there or elsewhere. Narky Blert (talk) 20:25, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

FAR for Yosemite

I have nominated Yosemite National Park for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 07:33, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Snow cave

Snow cave was created way back in 2005, but it never seems to have really been assessed since that time. It's creation might pre-date WikiProjects which could explain why no banners had been added to its corresponding talk page until I do so earlier today. Would some members of this WikiProject mind taking a look at the article and assessing it? A fair amount of unsupported content was additionally added to the article earlier today by an IP, but even prior to those edits there was quite a bit unsupported content. Over the years a lot of WP:VNT type of edits might have been made in good faith, but these would still be technically WP:OR. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:56, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Rope jumping listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Rope jumping to be moved to Rope jumping (extreme sport). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 20:05, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

primary research

I am doing some primary research on climbing equipment and will be posting on BigWalls.substack.com

For example, new info on early climbing ropes: https://bigwalls.substack.com/p/rope-technology-in-the-19th-century

I have been updating the Portaledge page to be inclusive of all brands and designs.

Recently I updated the Pitons page to include Birdbeaks, an important type of piton not mentioned.

John Middendorf contributing to Wikipedia climbing gear articles is a big plus. Your articles are excellent. 31.187.2.167 (talk) 13:16, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Merging of some climbing articles to the Glossary

User:Bermicourt reverted some climbing articles that I re-directed/merged to the Glossary of climbing terms, and asked me to discuss them on the Talk Page. Most of these articles get one genuine edit a year and even sparser talk page activity. I have been tidying up the main climbing categories, which is where I came across these articles. As a measure of my bona fides to improve the WP climbing project, I note niche articles I have upgraded such as Enchainment and Redpoint (climbing), as I know there is more to these terms and there is material worth chronicling. However, for the ones I merged and redirected to the Glossary, I have the subject matter expertise to know that there is no chance for such expansion and that the topic itself is more of a WP:NOTADICTIONARY issue. I have therefore brought the list here for consideration, and to clarify my rationale to Bermicourt who might reconsider their reversion (to clarify, I think Bermicourt was acting in good faith but unaware of how "thin" the WP climbing community is).

Crux (climbing), this is purely a climbing glossary term. There are no books/articles on cruxes as it is not a subjet in of itself (the "grading" of a crux is a major part of climbing which is why the grade article is very important, and one I hope to tidy-up later on; theere is no point repeating material in two articles).

Direttissima (climbing), same as per Crux; a pure Glossary term (a reader might search for), there are no articles/books etc. on the "concept" of a "Direttissima".

Normal route, same as per Crux; a pure Glossary term (a reader might search for), there are no articles/books etc. on the "concept" of a "normal route".

Exposure (heights), same as per Crux; a pure Glossary term (hence why all its references are dictionary/climbing glossaries), again, no no articles/books etc. on the "concept" of "exposure" (there are a lot of books on the "medical" term of exposure, but that is different).

Mountain sport, this is just a badly FORKed artile of the major mountaineering-head article that serves no additional purpuse, except as a FORK.

Sure-footedness, this is more of a straight WP:NOTADICTIONARY (i.e there are major WP articles around balance etc. that cover this wider topic). The article is just a fill-out of a colloquial term.

Happy to discuss further here if needed. thanks. (talk) 17:53, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm sure this is resolvable if we follow the normal Wiki processes and give editors a chance to reach a consensus in each case. The main issue here is that deleting an entire article and replacing it with a redirect to a single-sentence definition in a glossary is something that should be discussed and agreed with other editors on the talk page first. Each case is different and should be assessed on its merits.

The context is that User 78.18.249.143 has made over 1,000 changes to climbing articles since joining Wikipedia about 3 weeks ago. Nothing basically wrong with that - the editor seems to have a good knowledge of the subject and we welcome that - however, a quick scan through the changes rings alarm bells e.g. there are examples of:

• Insufficient or no explanation of the change
• Unencyclopedic comments such as "mess of an article" or "rm crap"
• Re-reverting another editor (not me) instead of opening a discussion under WP:BRD
• Deleting significant quantities of text whether cited or not (WP does not require that uncited text is automatically removed)

A strong theme is that these articles only merit a glossary entry. Well that's up for debate. Many are referenced and have articles on other language WPs. Some of these terms may not be familiar to editors because they are not used in their home region, but are used elsewhere in the world and in the literature. More importantly, before deleting them, editors here should be given the opportunity to form their own opinions after further research and allowed to reach a consensus.

I'm sure the edits are being made in good faith and it may be that all that is needed is to explain and follow the normal Wikipedia processes for reaching consensus and making agreed changes. To that end, I would also encourage 78.18.249.143 to register with us and make use of the guidance available to new users (apologies if you've already done this before). Hope that helps. Bermicourt (talk) 20:41, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Bermicourt, that is an unfair characterization above. For example, the "Re-reverting another editor (not me) instead of opening a discussion under WP:BRD" was probably my removing a chunk of unreferenced material on BLP Andy Lewis (performer), for which I could find no refs (having looked), by an over-zealous patroller. When I explained to them the situation, they moved. I could make the same case on all of your examples above that seek to discredit me. Anybody who has looked at the articles I have worked on (per my earlier examples) would get a very different impression and would see that I have good subject-matter expertise and a desire to improve WP Climbing (a lot). Having gone through many WP Climbing articles I can see you have the same objectives. I hope my being an IP (which is outside of my control), doesn't lessen people's desire to have a constructive dialogue with me. 78.18.249.143 (talk) 13:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

PS: I have an idea from another discussion I have had (which I am going to move here), which might solve things, which is to have a better Climbing route article that would include these kinds of terms above, but in a better format/context. 78.18.249.143 (talk) 13:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Crux, Direttissina, Normal route (how was this ever created), and Exposure (for heights), are not really articles but just terms used in climbing. Mountain sport is a strange article, Mountaineering already exists (there isn’t a separate Olympic mountaineering sport?). Surefooted-ness is also weird, and not even sure it is a real climbing term but just a word in the English language to describe a sense of balance or a head for heights? 31.187.2.167 (talk) 13:12, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

The place to discuss individual articles is on their own talk pages, not here, as each case is different. But for clarification "mountain sport" should be "mountain sports" but WP doesn't like plural titles; so it covers all sports that may take place in mountainous terrain, not just mountaineering. Bermicourt (talk) 14:45, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

There is so little discussion on Climbing articles, that if we can't get a discussion here, there is no point trying, and better to use AfD instead. It is a bit depressing how little participation there is in WP Climbing; didb't realise it was this low. 78.18.249.143 (talk) 13:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

I disagree. I would certainly participate in the talk page discussions and I'm sure if we flagged them up to related Wiki projects, other editors might join in. Bermicourt (talk) 14:13, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Climbing area redirected

Moved from User talk:78.18.249.143 § Climbing area redirected

 – —Alalch E. 13:32, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello dear IP! I see the work that you're doing, and I especially like how you overhauled the climbing navbox. But I'm not so sure about redirecting climbing area to crag within the glossary, because some climbing areas are too large an area to be called a crag. We have Category:Climbing areas, with many articles about climbing areas, and we even have Template:Infobox climbing area... of course these internal "references" don't prove that it's a good subject for a standalone article. Yes, the 20 year old article had exactly 0 references, but is the notion of a climbing area really WP:OR?

Maybe references can be found. The German article climbing area has some references and seems more solid than ours (was).

For example, look at climbing route, it is a similar article, also essentially unreferenced, but I'm certain that there can be a decent article about this topic -- we're just not there yet.

Climbing region and Rock climbing area redirect to climbing area and is are now double redirects.

Got any thoughts about all this? Sincerely —Alalch E. 22:38, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi User:Alalch E., and thank you for that. I have had some free time over the last few weeks and have been trying to get "head" articles like history of rock climbing and List of first ascents (sport climbing) updated, as well as key BLPs like Wolfgang Gullich, Catherine Destivelle and Alexander Huber. I was going through the WikiProject Climbing to look at un-rated/un-referenced articles, which is where I found Climbing area, being old and unreferenced. You make some good points above, so let me sleep on it. One thought is to materially upgrade Climbing route, for which I think there could be a bigger article (types of routes, key terms like pitch, crux etc. from the glossary). That could incorporate a sub-section on Climbing area that would have a small paragraph on the concept (there isn't really a definition)? I find "conceptual" articles on WP rarely last (i.e. ones that don't have lots of referenced content available). For example, Redpoint (climbing) or Enchainment, which I fixed up, have a niche but tangible referenced material that is specific and relevant (i.e. not trying to pad-out/sustain a concept). However, I am open-minded about this? 78.18.249.143 (talk) 01:08, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

PS, would you be willing to help add new climbing categories and help to rename some climbing articles? thanks. 78.18.249.143 (talk) 01:08, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Let me interject with a question: Do you agree that I move this section from your talkpage to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Climbing? —Alalch E. 11:39, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, definitely, although I have found the WP Climbing project to be very thin on participation (a bit depressing). Was thinking that we have Climbing (the verb), which I have tidied up to incorporate all the "types" of climbing (i.e. is it a useful "head article" from which editors can be navigated to other articles). We could make Climbing route (the noun) into such a "head article" and explain terms like Climbing area, and many other terms (Crux, etc.), that would otherwise be Glossary material? Otherwise, we will end up with very short articles on Climbing area (just a short paragraph), which future editors will also think about redirecting to the climbing Glossary. What do you think? 78.18.249.143 (talk) 13:42, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I think that it's a good idea to cover climbing route and climbing area in a single article (under Climbing route). —Alalch E. 13:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Peter John Watson for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Peter John Watson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter John Watson until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:47, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Help renaming a major climbing article

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I have been doing some work cleaning up climbing BLPs (Wolfgang Gullich, Catherine Destivelle and Alexander Huber), and even History of rock climbing. I like editing as an IP as it suits me on various fronts. However, i cannot move/rename articles, and cannot create an article. Rather than going to requested moves/AFC (which takes weeks, and I am not sure if the general audience understands the topic), I wonder if there are any active WikiProject Climbing editors who might help me here.

My immediate needs is to move List of first ascents (sport climbing) to List of grade milestones in rock climbing. I fixed this article up a lot, but it is not just a list of first ascents (and not just in sport climbing), but a list of the key ascents (in sport, trad, big wall and bouldering) that set new milestones in climbing grades. I don't think the move is that contentious.

I also have a short list of other climbing articles that could do with re-naming to make their titles aligned in format (i.e. Separate Reality (climbing route) should be Separate Reality (climb), and Hubble (climbing route) should be Hubble (climb), as per most others like Action Directe (climb) and Silence (climb).

I can see from the list of members that many are no longer active, but I can see User:Cullen328 and User:Nick Moyes are, so pinging them. 78.18.249.143 (talk) 14:14, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

As it's a 'no brainer' I've changed the Separate Reality and Hubble articles to match the few other route names on Wikipedia. (Ashamed to say I'd not heard of the latter, despite Raven Tor being very local to me.)

I'd prefer to wait and give time for others to comment on the renaming List of first ascents (sport climbing) as I am less happy to rush to change that. 'Sport climbing' seems to be a much more appropriate word to include in the title than 'rock climbing' as the article doesn't consider anything below 7a grade. Yet History of rock climbing (referred to in the lead) evidently mentions significant grade uplifts even at the HS 4b level. As the lead of List of first ascents (sport climbing) refers specifically to sport climbing and boulder problems, would not List of grade milestones in sport climbing be a far more appropriate name to change it to? Nick Moyes (talk) 11:49, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you User:Nick Moyes for that. I found one more outlier in which is Midnight Lightning (bouldering), that should probably also be Midnight Lightening (climb) (I don't think it is worth starting a new format for boulders, i.e. Midnight Lightning (boulder).

Regarding List of first ascents (sport climbing), I have done a lot of work on this over the year. Firstly, I do think that "grade milestones" is the right word instead of "first ascents", which I think you also agree with. This is the substitution that I felt would be harder to explain at WP:RM etc, but it is correct.

Secondly, if you have a good read through the List of first ascents (sport climbing) article, you will see that it is not just sport climbing routes (i.e. bolted), but also traditional climbing (pre-1980s; I am going to add more modern trad climbing grade milestones), bouldering, big wall climbing, deep-water soloing, and free soloing. Ultimately, all of these are sub-disciplines of rock climbing (per History of rock climbing). I also think that it is better to have them all in the one rock climbing article as it keeps formats aligned. I think the sport climbing to rock climbing swap is therefore also non-contentious. thanks for your help. 78.18.249.143 (talk) 17:56, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

I have tidied up the lede in the List of first ascents (sport climbing) article so it is more obvious that it is rock climbing (vs. just sport climbing), and grade milestones (vs. any first ascent). Hope that will help clarify that I think this a non-contentious move (i.e. it is a more accurate representation of the article). 78.18.249.143 (talk) 13:13, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, this article is clearly Grade milestones and the scope is rock climbing and not just sport climbing. 31.187.2.167 (talk) 13:01, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

The page should be ‘List of grade milestones in rock climbing’. Current title is ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.240.251.250 (talk) 08:51, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, please do change the name of this article which is wrong. It is grade milestones in rock climbing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.128.88.55 (talk) 18:12, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Aszx5000 (talk) 11:55, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Notability and sources

Having gone through a fair number of climbing BLPs, I have found examples of candidates whose Wikipedia notability is mainly based on their climbing, but whose name appears nowhere in any of the main climbing journals and magazines. I have updated two new sections on "Climbing soures" and "Notability" at Wikipedia:WikiProject Climbing/Article recommendations that I hope are helpful, and might serve as a useful guide for editors. Perhaps a version could be addded to Wikipedia:Notability (sports). 78.18.228.191 (talk) 16:30, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

very good job and long overdue. should be incorporated to NSPORTS? 151.95.18.160 (talk) 07:13, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Glossary of climbing terms

Well done to the editors who have finally cleaned up this article. Great to see the renewed interest in wiki-climbing! 31.187.2.188 (talk) 16:15, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Move Climbing competition to "Competition climbing"

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Climbing competition should be moved to "Competition climbing", as per Sport climbing, Traditional climbing, Aid climbing etc. It is now a major *type* of climbing (and in the Olympics), and should be re-named accordingly (it even includes the large sub-genre of Speed climbing). 78.18.249.143 (talk) 15:40, 29 December 2022 (UTC) 78.18.249.143 (talk) 15:44, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Competition climbing is an important form of rock climbing and is the more important topic. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:25, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Someone has undone this and moved it back to “climbing competitions”, which is completely wrong (includes non professional), without checking it here?? 31.187.2.215 (talk) 17:51, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

I have asked for this to be fixed but I think an administrator is needed to reverse what has been done. Not sure why it happened, the person who did it said is was a WP:RMUM but I did not see them here? 78.19.88.172 (talk) 18:08, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

I have been away so had missed this. Have replied at the talk page to support changing it back to 'Competition climbing' (which it clearly is). It is only one senior editor who is clearly a non-climber, and has misread the topic, that it against it. However, they ignore all facts presented and create new, wilder, arguments. A bit depressing in some ways, especially given the popularity of 'competition climbing' for new editors on Wikipedia, but I do not see a way forward now. Aszx5000 (talk) 19:18, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Level-5 Vital Articles

I have made a submission at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5 to have Richard Bass (never a Level-5 candidate) and Steph Davis (not really at Level-5 standard, and many more deserving female cases well ahead of her) removed. I also asked for Wolfgang Güllich to be made Level-5 (I think he is the equivalent to Chris Sharma and Adam Ondra, who are rightly Level-5s.)

I do think that his project should take an interest in the Level-5 list for the climbing and mountaineering section

In my view, it is missing for female:

• Josune Bereziartu, equivalent female rock-climber to Lynn Hill (who is a classic Level-5).
• Catherine Destivelle, probably the strongest female all-round climber in history (rock, alpinism, and Himalayan).
• Edurne Pasaban, first female to do all 14 eight thousanders (they do rightly have Gerlinde Kaltenbrunner, first to do without oxygen as Level-5).
• Janja Garnbret, the greatest-ever female indoor Olympic rock climber.

In my view, it is missing for male:

• Wolfgang Gullich, greatest with Ondra and Sharma, and given he broke more new grades than Ondra or Sharma, is possibly the greatest sport climber in history (i.e. father of sport climbing).
• Jerzy Kukuczka, after Messner, the 2nd greatest Himalayan mountaineer per the eight thousander list
• Fred Nicole, the real inventor of modern bouldering (like Gullich of bouldering), and created most of the hardest bouldering routes
• I think we need to have some of the greatest alpine/mixed climbers, such as Ueli Steck and Denis Urubko (harder area to judge, one could also consider Gaston Rébuffat, and Walter Bonatti).

Cases could be made for others (Jerry Moffatt, Ed Viesturs, Margo Hayes, Ron Kauk, Antoine Le Menestrel, Francois Legrand etc.), but I think the WikiProject Climbing should make sure that Level-5 includes the "no brainer" greats (and not include the ones that aren't clearly so). 78.18.243.8 (talk) 13:47, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

I am not familiar with level5 rules, but your proposed list seems sensible. I would also agree that Bonatti and Rebufet be added, and would also suggest Comici and Royal Robbins as founders of modern large wall climbing. John Gill is another possible for bouldering. 31.187.2.16 (talk) 08:07, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

I wound aggree with all the main suggestions (in the bulllets), and the additional ones above of Comici, Rebuffet, Bonatti and Robins. 31.187.2.138 (talk) 20:22, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Gullich, Destivelle and Bonatti are the three most obvious ones, should be obvious they are at highest level. 93.240.251.250 (talk) 08:48, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Wolfgang Gullich, Josune Bereziartu, Catherine Destivelle, and Edurne Pasaban have now been added to Level 5 for climbing/mountaineering, while Dick Bass, Steph Davis and Dean Potter, have been taken off (they should never have been considered Level 5's for climbing/mountaineering). The big outstanding omission is probably Walter Bonatti. 78.18.228.191 (talk) 15:25, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I have proposed Bonatti as a Level 5 at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5#Add Walter Bonatti. 78.18.228.191 (talk) 15:17, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Will support. 31.187.2.86 (talk) 20:30, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Registered my support. Cassin is the next strongest candidate, with Janja, Steck and Marco as next strongest. They have Mallory and Irvine also listed? The ultimate BLP1Es?? 31.187.2.16 (talk) 20:40, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, Level 5 is far too Everest-heavy. I would say Janja is the next big omission. 78.18.228.191 (talk) 20:45, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

+1 with both comments. 151.95.18.160 (talk) 06:54, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Support Bonatti for sure, and agree that there are too many "Everest" names. Aszx5000 (talk) 19:19, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Made my !vote for Bonatti and closed a passed. The other one that should be done is Cassin. After that, then there is probably no need for Mallory and Irvine, and the Level 4s should be Messner and Bonatti. Aszx5000 (talk) 00:19, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:38, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Seems like a good idea that the WikiProject Climbing should have no problem with. Aszx5000 (talk) 16:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Michael Finn-Henry - input requested

Please see this deletion discussion:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Finn-Henry

Does this climber rate a Wikipedia article? Are there reliable sources to establish notability?

Thanks, --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 23:15, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Draft:EP Climbing (Entre-Prise climbing holds)

Hello -- Wondered if anyone could help out assessing whether this draft is useful; it's a bit promotional and undersourced but I think the company was genuinely an innovator in indoor climbing. Thanks for any help you can offer the creator. Espresso Addict (talk) 14:23, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

I will take a look at it later. EP is definitely the most notable company in the design and construction of indoor climbing walls (official supplier to the IFSC for years here). So notable and would get coverage in the climbing magazines like Climbing, Gripped, and Grimper. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:32, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, that's good to know! Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 22:45, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Magnus Midtbø (climber) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Magnus Midtbø (climber) to be moved to Magnus Midtbø. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 06:06, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Merge Template:Infobox climber with Template:Infobox mountaineer

A proposal has been made to merge Template:Infobox climber with Template:Infobox mountaineer at templates for discussion here: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 May 31. Aszx5000 (talk) 10:39, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

English term for Goulotte

Hi, What's the proper English term for fr:Goulotte (alpinisme)? There is no article on English WP, and no category on Commons yet. Thanks, Yann (talk) 21:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

There isn't really a direct translation into English mountaineering as far as I know. A couloir is a wider snow/ice covered gully (there is often the definition that you can ski down a gully/couloir, but there are narrow couloirs/gullies). 'Couloir' is widely used in en-mountaineering.

A French goulette is much narrower than a couloir, and typically one person wide and more ice than snow. I have heard 'goulotte' used in Scottish ice climbing, but ice routes that are like goulettes can also be called "ribbons (of ice)", "seams (of ice)", or even "drains (of ice)". Some just call them "very narrow couloirs". Not as widely used in en-mountaineering as couloir, but is used. Aszx5000 (talk) 01:26, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

High altitude breathing apparatus

If anyone here is interested in contributing either directly or by suggestions to High altitude breathing apparatus it would be very welcome, as I do not have access to any useful climbing sources, or if I do, I don't know what they are. Please ping with replies. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 14:54, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

We have rarely used O2 canisters with demand BVM to optimize for 'recycling' the high exhalation CO2 & O2, but generally only for ('death-zone') medical or tactical "emergency use". (I would rather not climb where I think these risky, cumbersome, & troublesome systems are likely needed for me.)

There is also the use of preconditioning (CO2/O2/N2 stressing) equipment, typically used in conjunction with a sleeping tent. Boldklub-PJs (talk) 22:42, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Cobra_Crack#MOS:ITAL

Discussion on if climbing routes should be in italics on WP. If you have an opinion, please join. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:48, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Sport climbing at the Summer Olympics

Linking a discussion here to increase participation.

Talk:Sport climbing at the Summer Olympics#Sport climbing at the Summer Olympics

Basic summery: Should grades of the climbs be listed, and if so how many/which grading system should be. Mn1548 (talk) 19:53, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Rock-climbing equipment listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Rock-climbing equipment to be moved to Rock climbing equipment. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 15:01, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Suggesting a change of WP:WikiProject Climbing/Article recommendations

Per the discussion at Talk:Cobra_Crack#MOS:ITAL, I suggest the project's Article Guidelines change from

• Route names should be italicized

to

• Per MOS:ITAL, route names should not be italicized Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:06, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Nobody seems to have objections, so I'd say you can just go ahead and do it! Gawaon (talk) 19:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I have no problem with the names of routes not being italicised in the titles of Wikipedia articles, however, it would be a complete pain to use alternatives to using italic names in the body of articles, and it is a well-established format in many major climbing media (although not in all climbing media). Hope that would work for all. Aszx5000 (talk) 09:31, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Per the Cobra Crack discussion, I don't see the problem with treating them as any other geographical feature/road, in title or elsewhere in the article, and I don't think the general WP reader or editor does either. The currently non-ital Cobra Crack is how readers and editors in general expects such an article to look, that's my view. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:01, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

There is a reason why a lot of major climbing media italicise names, which is to avoid confusion to the reader of sentences. I didn't want to swap the Cobra Crack discussion with examples because climbers are generally over-ruled by non-climbers on climbing debates about climbing articles in Wikipedia (I have mostly given up per here). Aszx5000 (talk) 10:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

It's a recurring thing on WP. Whether your interest is climbing, WWII, Olympians or roads, sometimes the way you want to do stuff bumps up against the larger WP-preference. Why doesn't the Manual of Style always follow specialized practice? is on point here, I think. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:58, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I have seen projects with bigger participation amend the MOS-type guidelines for that they consider convention in their area. I think the issue is that participation is so low in climbing that it gets overruled. Aszx5000 (talk) 11:07, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

To convince the "outsiders", I think you would need a good example that shows how ordinary type would be confusing and formatting would help the reader. Perhaps there is a route whose name is a common word? If you could give people a real example of a route with a generic sounding name like "The Mountain", which could realistically result in an extremely confusing sentence like "Alice climbed the mountain up the mountain", then non-climbers might see the need. If the routes all have names like Royal Arches Route, then there can be no such confusion. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:15, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

I gave many examples of major climbing media (including the largest climbing magazines) who use italic names for routes in their articles to avoid confusion, but they carried no weight. These media don't do for fun, they do it to help their readers. That is what we are supposed to be doing? Aszx5000 (talk) 18:28, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Maybe they do it because they think it helps their readers, maybe because they like the emphasis is gives, maybe just because some designer thought it was a neat idea or because they have thoughtlessly copied it from some other magazine that does the same. Unless there is good evidence that confusion will actually result in the absence of italics, the argument "somebody else does it" carries no weight. Gawaon (talk) 18:56, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

These are major climbing publications, and not "somebody else". Aszx5000 (talk) 19:12, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Which is "somebody else" from the POV of Wikipedia's style. See also all the debates over whether to stylize brands, such as Ke$ha. "But all the genre-specific publications do this" has not traditionally been persuasive.

What has been persuasive is evidence that not following the convention is confusing. One of the fastest ways to convince people that something is confusing is to let them personally experience the confusion themselves. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:42, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Take this example from the Cobra Crack article, before I removed the ital:

"Reporting on Didier Berthod's failed 2005 attempt, El Pais called Cobra Crack "the most difficult fissure on the planet", while Desnivel said..."

From where I'm sitting, the route-ital here is more likely to cause confusion than to avoid it. Not a lot of confusion, mainly it just looks odd. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:40, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

In that example, I agree. It makes it look like the route is a publication. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:57, 1 September 2024 (UTC)