Talk:Mountain hut

aber es gibt auch ein wichtige Frage zu stellen:

obwohl das Bild wirklich schön ist, was gibt es zu der Artikel? Wir haben schon zwei andere Bilder - zwei Bilder, die besser Bilder von Hütten sind - und dieses zeigt nichts neu. Es gibt fast genauso viel Bild als es Text gibt, also vielleicht ist es besser dieses Bild zu löschen.

Can some better European than I, please render this in English :-( Bob aka Linuxlad 20:45, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

I can, i'm the one who originally wrote it. its probably unnecessary in german, but im spending a year in Germany and was thinking in German as i wrote it (having just gotten back from school). It's in response to the reversion back to the three-picture page. It's important to ask, what does the third picture add to the article? Sure, it's a great picture...but we already have to pictures that not only suffice, they are better pictures of the huts themselves. This one adds nothing with regards to the article that isn't already shown in the other two. And right now, theres about as much image as there is text, so maybe it is better to get rid of this third picture.jfg284 23:30, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

If a picture needs to be removed, then it's the Australian one. The building shown there seems not to be an actual Alpine hut, as it apparently doesn't offer any sleeping places for mountaineers (it's obviously too small). Besides, it does not seem to be located in Alpine surroundings, but simply in some forest on a hill (at least that's what it looks like). I originally added the Payerhütte picture because it was available in commons at that time, and I thought it was very typical for a large hut in the Eastern Alps. It's also typical for the stunning setting huts sometimes are located in, which itself is highly relavant to the topic of the article. The French hut is much less typical in my experience because of the unusual architecture. Please also have a look at the German page which has a list of huts and a lot more pictures. Martg76 11:18, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Merge?

Oppose merge of alpine hut and climbing hut - the UK tradition of 'climbing hut' is very different from what would be conjured up in the mind of a German or French person by Alpine Hut. The distinction is useful, and not costly to keep. 'Ty powder' might just squeeze in, but the Count House? or any of the myriad of 'huts' in North Wales? Linuxlad 13:16, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Merging doesn't mean we pretend they're the same thing, it actually means we're better placed to describe what the *differences* are, rather than repeating all the similarities twice. Look at this strange sentence:

In the Alps the Alpine huts are placed near the start of glacier approaches, enabling an early start (an 'Alpine start') to be made safely on glaciated terrain. The huts are usually purpose-built, wardened during the summer season, and provide meals and refreshments to walkers.

That's in Climbing hut! By combing these two together, with Bothy and Wilderness hut perhaps, we could make the following key features of each clear:

• Where they're found
• Whether passers by can use them
• Whether they are staffed
• Whether they provide food, or just shelter

Do you agree? Stevage 13:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I do not know about Climbing Huts in the UK, but what is conjured up in the above remarks definitely is not true. Mountain huts in the alps can be everything, from big hotels (Franz Senn Hut, Konkordia hut) to normal mountaineering huts, to small huts not more than a room with a fire place. So the UK Climbing huts are nothing else than small huts. In the alpine clubs of Germany, Swizzerland and Austria there is a category system for mountain huts. Finally: Please forget the rubbish about "In the Alps the Alpine juts are placed near the start of a glacier approaches...". Take a look at the map of the alps and the huts, then you will see that there are hundreds of huts not close to any glacier. Norbusan 12:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Additional comment: From the definition of "category 1" huts in the alpine club: Huts which have to keep their original character as base for mountaineers and hikers. Simple style, simple food...not reachable with mechanical aids ... access at least 1 hour on foot. IT CAN BE WARDED, UNWARDED, or a BIVOUC! (big from me). SO I guess this definitely shows that Climbing huts are part of Alpine huts (if we accept that Alpine huts can occur outside the alps, too). Norbusan 12:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

So your final conclusion appears to be that Alpine Huts can be merged into Climbing Huts :-) (Rather than vice versa?) Linuxlad 19:03, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't sound like it to me. The term "alpine hut" refers to a large class of shelters, of which a UK "climbing hut" is one. But if we're on the track to mergism, where do we stop? Should all these articles be merged with hostels? Should all buildings be merged into a single article to better illustrate their differences? What about the extensive network refugios in the Dolomites?

I would suggest that sufficient differences exist to warrant separate articles for these different types of structures and accomodations. The fact that nobody here has been able to apply the time and effort to populate the articles with original prose does not diminish these differences, and thus is not an incentive to merge the articles.

This {{merge}} has been sitting around for many months. If there are no objections in the next week, I'll remove the merge tags on Friday November 10th.  ◉ ghoti 05:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

• Sorry to be leaving my contribution to such a late stage, but I would support the merger. There is almost no difference between alpine huts and climbing huts. Their aims are the same - to provide basic accommodation for climbers and mountaineers in a mountainous area. Their organisation is much the same - they are run by climbing clubs on a non-commercial basis (usually); they may be either staffed or unstaffed. They look and work the same - both can be very small and very basic or big and not-so-basic. There is bigger difference between the different grades of alpine huts or climbing huts as there is between alpine huts in general and climbing huts in general. The argument that if we merge these we might as well merge with hostel doesn't add up - hostels can be located anywhere, mainly in towns, and are aimed at the general public. Rwxrwxrwx 11:32, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Argh, I was hoping for progress through disinterest.  :) Okay, so no change today. My initial instinct was to retain separate pages because I'm not familiar enough with this UK usage to know for sure different the meanings are. The two pages look pretty similar, but the only external references I can find seem to indicate that "Climbing hut", "Wilderness hut" and "Bothy" are all region-specific terms, while "Alpine hut" is used world-wide. Can anyone else, preferably with more direct knowledge of the usage of these terms in England and Europe, provide further wisdom?  ◉ ghoti 20:30, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the only difference really is that huts in the UK and Ireland can't claim to be "alpine" since the mountains are smaller, but if "alpine hut" is the generally-used term, I don't see why we can't just turn "climbing hut" into a redirect to this article, maybe adding a few words about the regional variations. Have a look at the picture in Irish Mountaineering Club; I took that photo yesterday. Rwxrwxrwx 20:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I am certainly sensitive to the concept of "alpine huts" that are not near mountains. The Alpine Club of Canada maintains a hut for traditional rock climbers on a lake in Bon Echo Provincial Park. Max three pitches, and most climbs start from the boat. There are no mountains in Ontario. I guess I'm struggling with whether WP articles should be per term or per concept.  :-P  ◉ ghoti 15:14, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Contradiction?

I have tagged the paragraph on UK/Irish mountain huts with {{cleanup}}, because it seems contradictionary. On one hand, it offers the converted "unwardened" huts as comparable to bothies; on another, it states they're generally not accessible to passersby. What are they, then? Conserved houses for emergency shelter? This needs to be clarified. Digwuren 14:50, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Er, Locked but bookable facilities (can't see why you made the last leap). Bob aka Linuxlad 15:21, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Merger

I suggest merge to the Alpine hut article. Alpine hut refer not only to the Alps but also to same buildings in other regions. This can be seen e.g. by the interwikis there. It is unnecessary to have two articles about the same thing. - Darwinek (talk) 09:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I concur, but both should be merged into a new article "Mountain hut", which has got most hits on Google.
Mountain hut 193,000
Mountain shelter 147,000
Mountain hostel 63,000
Alpine hut 46,500
Tourist shelter 784
--Svetovid (talk) 09:43, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. I also noticed several times before mountain hut is more frequently used. - Darwinek (talk) 09:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Alpine hut is specific to the Alpine region, mountain huts are more general. I'd have only one final comment: there are two different de wiki articles on those: de:Alpenvereinshütte and de:Bergbaude. Perhaps somebody with knowledge of German could read them, see if they indeed support merger and try to merge them on de wiki too?--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 11:36, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

If nothing happens, there is still no problem. We have dual interwikis on many pages on en wiki. - Darwinek (talk) 11:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Elizabeth Parker hut.jpg

The image Image:Elizabeth Parker hut.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --11:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I have added another photo of the Elizabeth Parker hut that does not seem to have copyright issues and is properly licensed for use on Wikipedia. Jim Heaphy (talk) 21:15, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I received email permission from the Alpine Club of Canada to post this image from an authorized representative of that organization. I'll ask the folks at the ACC to submit their permission in a format that WP finds more authoritative/acceptable.  ◉ ghoti 01:45, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Globalize

The picture examples of mountain huts do all belong to Europe and North America. In order to reflect a more worldwide perspective we would need a more balanced selection of pictures. I thin that 2 or 3 pictures of mountain huts in the Alps are enought. Examples of places not represented include:

• Russia
• Japan
• Nepal
• Africa
• South America
• Middle East

Dentren | ^Talk 22:23, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

If anyone has some pictures of mountain huts in the places mentioned above, I'm certain that they would be gladly included in the article. I don't favour deleting those already included in the absence of a convincing case for doing so.--Yeti Hunter (talk) 07:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

First AMC Hut

The 1904 shelter at Carter Notch was not the AMC's first hut in the White Mountains, nor is it still in use. (The existing hut at Carter dates to 1914.) The first AMC hut in the Whites was built at Madison Spring in 1888. I revised, and replaced the citation of the inaccurate 10th Mt. Division page with a citation from the AMC's hut history timeline. 206.208.105.129 (talk) 18:06, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Definition and more primitive mountain huts

I was interested to find this definition of a mountain hut by a leading British alpinist: "A mountain hut is a purpose-built refuge situated at some strategically high place in the mountains so that one or more peaks are readily accessible from it. It may vary from a simple bivouac shelter to something resembling a small hotel in size and facilities".. Should this article be expanded to include more primitive huts? See also Talk: Wilderness path. Rwood128 (talk) 14:52, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

References