Talk:Pit cave

Geology Low‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Pit cave is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Caves

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caves, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of caving and cave articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CavesWikipedia:WikiProject CavesTemplate:WikiProject CavesCaves articles

Added details

Have added some details concerning the development of pit caving in Europe.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.149.36.50 (talk)

Pitch?

Nobody outside of England knows what a pitch is. Maybe this article should be rewritten so as not to be so anglo-centric. Senor Cuete (talk) 21:12, 23 October 2008 (UTC)Senor Cuete[reply]

Inappropriate US spelling

The article refers to several European locations. These references should not be using US spelling.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.153.197.243 (talk)

Yes - I will fix that.Wafty towels (talk) 19:14, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the portion of the Manual of Style linked to by WP:ENGVAR especially the Consistency within articles section. Any specific articles about these locations have a strong national tie and should use the national variety of English; but, the mentions of them within this article should maintain the consistency of U.S. spelling. WTucker (talk) 23:40, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not US-centric. it is international in scope and subject matter.

The default spelling should therefore be international and for consistency, all US spellings should be removed, even in references to US locations.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.85.177.74 (talk)

Have you read WP:ENGVAR? It says "no variety is considered more correct than another". U.S. English has been established in this article by the first major contributor. Since no variety is preferred and there is no strong national tie to any particular variety, the variety of the first major contributor should be used for consistency within the article. Please stop warring over this, no variety of English is preferred over another. Oh, and please remember to sign your comments with 4 tildes (~~~~). Thanks. WTucker (talk) 13:21, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no preferred language, so "sp=us" needs to be deleted from all the conversion template instances.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.85.169.122 (talk)

The preferred language is English. The variety established by the first major contributor (actually, the very first contributor, notice the spelling of "specialized") and maintained for several years by numerous other editors is U.S. English. In what way and by what logic should the established variety now be changed? Why is "metre" to be preferred over "meter" for this article? It would seem to me that you are preferring a European variety of English over others even though "no variety is...more correct". U.S. English is long and well established in this particular article and there is no strong national tie to warrant a change. Why do you want to change it? Also: please stop warring; please read WP:ENGVAR; and please sign your comments. Thanks. WTucker (talk) 02:14, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abîme

I redirected the title Abîme here. As the British A glossary of geographical terms (1979) edited by Audrey N Clark and Laurence Dudley Stamp, says that abime is used currently in French but not internationally for a disused pothole. Or more to the point, the French disambiguation page says: Abîmes, gouffres très profonds. And fr:Gouffre interwikis here. --Bejnar (talk) 02:54, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I am reverting the redirect because a) it was properly sourced from the 1984 Geographical Dictionary of Physical Geography b) "pit cave" has a wider meaning and c) the "pit cave" article doesn't mention the word "abîme" anywhere. At the very least we need a discussion before dumping it. --Bermicourt (talk) 05:24, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(1) it was not dumped it was redirected, big difference between redirection and deletion; (2) proper sourcing has nothing to do with it, see the guideline at Wikipedia:Content forking; (3) noted in passing is that 1984 Geographical Dictionary of Physical Geography is a tertiary source. But please, go ahead; what is the narrower meaning of Abîme and why does it deserve its own article? If possible cite a secondary source. To the best of my knowledge abîme is not used in English language publications about karst topography, except where the original is in French and no translation of the term was sought for the English text. In looking at a couple of French texts that use it, see Google books, its meaning seems to vary somewhat, in fact to map (semanticly) essentially the same territory as pit cave when pit cave is applied to karst topography. It also seems to be used in French to mean a pothole that is no longer being formed. --Bejnar (talk) 02:36, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect image?

The image labelled 'The famous pit cave near Marinha Beach in Lagoa, Algarve, Portugal.' shows a type of sea cave which does not immediately seem to fit the definition of pit cave given in the article, unless perhaps some other part of this cave which does not appear in this photo does fit the bill - either way it doesn't seem relevant. cheers Geopersona (talk) 20:43, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]