Jump to content

Talk:Mount Greylock

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleMount Greylock was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 22, 2010Good article nomineeListed
August 27, 2010Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Alysscarlso.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023 edits etc

[edit]

Having more-or-less completed extensive and very carefully sourced re-doing of the articles on the Taconic Mountains, and Mount Everett and Mount Equinox, I've just made some moderately extensive edits to first few segments of article. Because the Greylock article is more extensive & developed at present, I doubt I'll do as much work here as on the aforementioned articles. A number of source citations in the Greylock article are dead links. I've added (so far) only one source and what should be a stable (?) link. In edits, I'm following idea "remove needless words." For example, X "is located in Y," changes to "X is in" Y. One "needless word" eliminated. I will probably continue with similar work on this article & may add additional sources. (No luck with limited efforts to revive dead citations.) 32.221.207.102 (talk) 15:19, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1980s BNR book, etc

[edit]

As of this moment, I've only glanced through the book (in reference list currently). Probably a very extensive, useful and reliable source for this article. I've very heavily edited this article, especially up to but not really including segment headed "History," as of the moment. I've added about a dozen sources. Current count is 72 references. Am guessing 20 or more are dead links at present and mostly not otherwise informative.


32.221.207.102 (talk) 16:32, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Hopper

[edit]

It's possible to find semi-authoritave source describing it as a "cirque," that's not the consensus view, apparently. The Hopper was formed by non-glacial erosion, they do say! 32.221.207.102 (talk) 20:18, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I may remove mention of glacial erosion in hopper. It's wrong, or very much in question, & so at minium, presentation is wrong. 32.221.207.102 (talk) 21:10, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've now done so, after personal communication with a source author, who (to me) retracts his statements regarding the Hopper as glacial cirque. Note that I am NOT citing personal communications, merely removing information that "The Hopper is a cirque." (Personally I assume glaciers somehow affected this topography, yet it appears the "scientific consensus" on this relatively unimportant and quite obscure issue is, that it's "not a cirque." My guy, a geologist, in reversing himself, cited (to me) in part Hopper's "lack of moraine," (and I think, lack of glacial scratch marks in relevant places). This, although no moraines are evident, according to legit geo sources, in at least several, actual, obvious and well-known cirques in northeastern USA. 32.221.207.102 (talk) 18:02, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]