Talk:Eiger/Archive 1

Archive 1

External links to climbing accounts?

Is there a problem with linking to external accounts of climbing the mountain? My link was deleted, but I think that climber's accounts provide valid information about the mountain routes, features, conditions & difficulty. Especially since my search on Google was less than productive (one story from 1998).

I'm going to try again & please comment before deleting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.71.154.154 (talk) 01:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Is your personal account of some special importance? In general we want external links to provide significant information not available in the article, or to be an authoritative source. While your personal story is no doubt interesting, we have no way of knowing whether your account is typical or atypical among Eiger climbs. Stan 03:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Your comment seems to imply that there are many Eiger climbing accounts available online, which is simply not true as I thought I pointed out. The Eiger is changing rapidly as the permafrost melts, resulting in major rockfall & vanishing icefields. The classic published accounts simply don't provide valid information about the current condition of this increasingly difficult mountain. The Eiger is inextricably linked to its culture of climbing in a way that most mountains are not. I believe that recent climbing accounts are important. The link I posted is a well-written account of a recent ascent, by a credible team, in difficult conditions. It provides a glimpse at the state of the mountain today: the train tunnel with its windows on the face that have played such a dramatic role in climbing history, the named features, the difficulty & commitment of the climbing, the role of weather & technology, the actual process of traversing such an enormous peak, the mountain hut culture. I see no reason why it shouldn't stay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.71.154.154 (talk) 16:17, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

WTF? Someone deleted it again without bothering to comment. I personally never leave a Wikipedia article as the last word on ANYTHING. I look for links to more info outside of Wikipedia. I don't believe that there is a blanket ban on external links that actually provide pertinent additional information. If you disagree, please discuss before randomly deleting things. I'm puttin git up AGAIN because it's good content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.71.154.154 (talk) 23:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Ogre?

Eiger = Ogre? Never heard of that combination. The german version has more infos and the name never had anything to do with man-eating creatures of children tales...

The Ogre is a mountain in Pakistan The Ogre (mountain) famous for its rock walls and difficult climbing.

I've heard this explanation many times before and it seems to be generally accepted. what is the info on the german language page? Trottsky 14:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

According to http://www.swissworld.org/en/switzerland/swiss_specials/swiss_mountains/names/ :

[...] the first to get its name was the Eiger, which was mentioned in the 13th century. It seems to refer to its pointed shape, although scholars differ as to whether it is related to the Latin "acer" = sharp, or the Swiss German "Ger", a javelin.

The german language wikipedia page only has the second explanation. Personally I have never heard the word "Eiger" as a synonym for ogre, though of course it could be an old word out of use today. caramdir (talk) 11:39, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

On the main page, "Jungfrau" is mistranslated. In a literal German translation, 'jung', indeed meaning young, and 'frau', indeed meaning woman, translate to young woman. However, the correct german for young woman would be Junge Frau. "Jungfrau" is in fact an old word for "virgin", or "maiden". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Axtract (talk • contribs) 22:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Chronology section - North Face DVD extra

Just a note that an earlier version of this section appears verbatim on the DVD. Edits here pre-date the DVD so there is no concern of plagiarism. Halsteadk (talk) 23:44, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Additions to history section

Excellent work, Masterstone. Can we now get citations for some, most, or all of those interesting ascents??? Ratagonia (talk) 23:16, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Ratagonia. [However, once I falled into an 'overamendment' – in my edition of 2 March 2010, 18:22, that 1961 Czechoslovak team would be in fact Czech - what is not true. Fortunately, it was improved quickly (Revision of 22:20, 5 March 2010) by the user with IP 66.226.197.178 and with these one and only one contribution and I would like to thanks to him/her but do not know if this is a dynamic or stationary IP.]

Presently I added some references mostly about Polish and other 'Slavonic climbs'. Many of them, if they are in internet – are in Polish (from the series of articles on the Eiger by trusted author on hugest Polish website on climbing – he widely uses many Polish, English, German and French published sources, translated decades ago – however, the identifying what is from what or is original would be a great and time consuming task).

Added printed sources and sources about French climbs are in English only.

By the way: In my opinion it would make the history of the mountain more clear, dividing the history of the climbs of the North Face from other ascents. Also speed records would be collected into another section or into the table. Both ideas exist in German version (in articles: de:Egier, section The Nordwand, and de:Eiger Nordwand, section Rekordzeiten-Entwicklung der Heckmair-Route). As the history is not divided, adding more ascents makes the text more and more 'non-readible'.

Regards Masterstone (talk) 22:25, 16 March 2010 (UTC)