Talk:Mount Kilimanjaro/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Kilimanjaro prominence

On occasion edits such as this pop up here and on other pages that give Kilimanjaro's prominence. Usually these are good faith edits, mistakenly assuming the figure to be a typo.

Mount Kilimanjaro's elevation is 5,895 m. Its prominence is 5,885 m. Here are a couple sources supporting this [1] [2] [3] [4]. That last link contains a footnote for Kilimanjaro that specifically explains the situation. Quoting directly from the source:

Kilimanjaro: As the highpoint of Africa, Kilimanjaro's key saddle is the low point that separates Africa from Eurasia. The elevation of the Suez Canal cut is functionally zero. A low point of 10m immediately to the west of the canal is assumed to have been the original KS. [5]

Kilimajaro's parent peak is Mount Everest. As explained at List of peaks by prominence, "By convention, cols created by human activity are not counted. Therefore, the Suez, Panama and other canals are ignored in these calculations. Cuts that lower the natural elevations of mountain passes are also ignored." So the natural low point (not the artificial cut) at Suez (10m) is Kilimajaro's key col to its parent, Everest.

Hope this clears up any confusion. --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 04:30, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

“Trivia” section

The recent wedding and cricket match are (minor) historical firsts, rather than trivial information. Might anyone suggest a better title for that section?  Unician ∇  20:05, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring over small changes in height

Please can we discuss the issue here instead. At peaklist our policy is to ignore small changes per new surveys unless they are officially recognized. In any case, 5890 is not supported by any source so I am reverting to 5895. I have also deleted the song reference as it contains a red link and is therefore probably not notable. Viewfinder (talk) 20:10, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Officially recognized by whom? Who has officially recognized the elevation specified in the article? I am adding the fact tag until that question is resolved. 75.34.84.53 (talk) 20:52, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

The summit sign and infobox source indicate that 5895 is still recognized by the government of Tanzania, unless anyone can supply evidence to the contrary. More recent unofficial surveys have found 8850m and 8614m for Everest and K2 respectively, but these are not recognized by the governments of the relevant countries so we do not use them at Wikipedia. Summit signs and official elevations are not always reliable, but I see no need to reject the official elevations unless (i) the error is in the order of tens of metres and (ii) multiple sources agree that the official elevation is wrong. Viewfinder (talk) 21:02, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Then you need to cite the reliable source for the summit sign. Should be simple for you to do that. 75.34.84.53 (talk) 21:08, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

The infobox source does that. Viewfinder (talk) 21:18, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I have since checked the detail of the primary source and found that in apparent contradiction of the secondary source currently cited, the height was measured at 5889.51-5890.79m, depending on the datum. That is the problem with changing the height each time there is a new survey, there is no precise answer. A downward revision of our elevation down by a few metres probably will give something a metre or two more accurate, but the change is very small, and which of the competing elevations do we go by? Therefore, I agree with the infobox source that until we can find evidence that Tanzania officially recognizes some other elevation, we should stay with the official elevation. Viewfinder (talk) 21:43, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Re the official height, is this OK? Viewfinder (talk) 21:47, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

No. When we have multiple reliable sources, we should present them all. I am editing the article accordingly. 75.34.84.53 (talk) 21:54, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I have checked your edits and I am not going to contest them. The range of the heights you have listed is 7 metres, I think this is low enough to uphold my case that the most familiar (5895) should remain in the infobox. If the competing elevations were say 50m or even 20m lower, then there would be an issue. For example, at Mount Damavand GPS readings have shown the traditional elevation to be 50m too high and I am not at all happy that it remains in the infobox. Viewfinder (talk) 13:41, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Jim Thompson or James Thomson

Jim Thompson claimed in 1885, although he also did not support his claim,[12]

I did some research and I am very sure that they meant Joseph Thomson ...98.223.222.116 (talk) 21:22, 13 November 2014 (UTC).