Talk:Ice tool
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Merger
[edit]Ice tools are technically correct and should be kept separate from ice axes. Check the references. I oppose merger.--OMCV (talk) 12:56, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- I agree. This is a specialized enough variation that it deserves a separate article. Jim Heaphy (talk) 02:32, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
- I don't agree. To my mind ice tools are just the combination of an ice axe and an ice hammer, the latter of which to date lacks an article of its own. The fact that the ice axe part of "ice tools" doesn't look exactly like a classic ice axe does not mean that a modern banana-shaped ice axe is not an ice axe. Indeed the ice tools page even states "[it is] often described broadly as an ice axe itself." Furthermore, the ice axe of the 1960s (and certainly the late 70s) is closer in looks and function to the modern version that it is to the alpenstock, which is itself part of the ice axe page. By Jim Heaphy's reasoning, alpenstock should have a page of its own as well. (I'm afraid that I can't check the reference OMCV, as it's a book I do not own.) Ericoides (talk) 15:39, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Merging the two would be akin to merging rock climbing shoe and mountaineering boot. Its true the two share a common ancestor and there are examples where the two have significant overlap [1] [2] but it just doesn't make sense to merge the articles.
"Ice tools" and "ice axes" have distinct designs and have different intended uses. If there was enough interest in the subject there would probably be a page for "aplinestock" since they can be distinguishable from modern "ice axes". For now I think "aplinestock" is best left in the history section of the "ice axe"'s page. The most importantly reason for keeping the "ice tool" page is that the term "ice tool" as well as its distinction from an "ice axe" is verifiable WP:V from a wide number of WP:RS.
Ericoides: I was going to recommend you pick up "Freedom of the Hills" if you plan to edit mountaineering material but from your edits it looks you have excessive mountaineering experience and would have little use for "Freedom of the Hills". I offer my above observations with respect for your experience in the field and on Wikipedia.
I added a few more references, I hope that helps. It looks like the term has been established for at least 10 years. An epistemology of the term would be nice but I think I'll add the leashed vs. leashless distinction first.--OMCV (talk) 17:51, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with your reasoning OMCV, so I have created a page for Alpenstock, moving the relevant material from Ice axe. Regards, Ericoides (talk) 10:22, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- On reflection, I think that some of my unease with there being two pages for what I see as one topic stems from possible US/UK differences in terminology. In the UK, ice tools are called ice tools, but they are also (and more commonly, I'd say) called ice axes. Another of their UK names – technical axes – might also be in more common use than ice tools. Long axes (65 cm+) are called ice axes in the UK, but to distinguish them from technical ice axes they are also called "walking axes" or "general mountaineering axes". From the look of the article as it currently stands (I take it that it has been edited a great deal by US editors), it seems that the "walking axe" is the topic under discussion. Ericoides (talk) 12:44, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- I definitely agree with the US/UK concerns. I guess that's always an issue with vernacular traditions that evolve in parallel. My main concern is that "tools" and "axes" are distinguished. I would be just as happy to call the page "technical axes" and say they are also commonly called "ice tools" (even though I think ice tools is a slightly more common term). My second concern is that we mention all the common naming conventions and distinctions, to that end I tried to add what you said above to the article itself.--OMCV (talk) 18:19, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- On reflection, I think that some of my unease with there being two pages for what I see as one topic stems from possible US/UK differences in terminology. In the UK, ice tools are called ice tools, but they are also (and more commonly, I'd say) called ice axes. Another of their UK names – technical axes – might also be in more common use than ice tools. Long axes (65 cm+) are called ice axes in the UK, but to distinguish them from technical ice axes they are also called "walking axes" or "general mountaineering axes". From the look of the article as it currently stands (I take it that it has been edited a great deal by US editors), it seems that the "walking axe" is the topic under discussion. Ericoides (talk) 12:44, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Merge with Ice axe
[edit]Having tidied up the mixed climbing and dry-tooling articles, I didn't even know that this article existed? While "Ice tool" is a term, so is "Ice axes" (i.e. leading mixed climbers will reference using "double ice axes" rather than "double ice tools"). And the fact that I only stumbled across this article today shows that ordinary readers aren't going to find it. Aszx5000 (talk) 09:51, 3 May 2023 (UTC)