Jump to content

Talk:Zemu Gap Peak

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Zemu Gap Peak. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:53, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Zemu Gap Peak. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:22, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Distinguish between Zemu Peak and Zemu Gap?

[edit]

Zemu Peak, a mountain with elevation 7780m, remains unclimbed (at least as of 2011), according to references 1 and 2. The attempts and ascents in references 3-6 and 10-11 refer to the Zemu Gap, a pass with elevation 5861m approximately 5 km east of Zemu Peak. The article conflates these two very different (albeit nearby) geographical features and implies that the peak was ascended in 2011, when in fact it was the gap.

Should Zemu Gap have its own article? John.velonis (talk) 05:21, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@John.velonis: you are 100% right, we are talking about 2 different things. I recently added https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12137244868 to start with. The question is whether the gap is relevant enough to have its own lemma and article. If not, the information about the gap could be included in the peak article, but paying attention to the difference between both (especially the wrong ascent entry in the infobox that I just corrected, this regards @Nayyn:). --Kuhni74 (talk) 13:53, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ChaseKiwi: no, Zemu Gap Peak remains unclimbed. The Gap is the saddle next to the Peak. --Kuhni74 (talk) 14:22, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes indeed. This is an article that was confusingly inflated by off topic material about an adjacent saddle which has given one name to the peak. And the parent name feature is unlikely to be notable enough to have its own article as its claim to notability is that it is a common name for the peak of the article. Should the bulk of the climbing bit on the saddle be added to a note with {{efn}} and {{notelist}} syntax which allows references and removed from the article itself? ChaseKiwi (talk) 05:44, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]