![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Moved here from article:
Unclear; it sounds to me like it refers to peakbagging in the Adirondacks, tho i'm not certain it's false about the Whites. Deserves clarification in any case.
It may be true that people do this, even tho it would multiply risks by considerably more than four. But i doubt it is verifiable, bcz i'll bet it would violate some geographic limits on hiking and camping. Let's see some verification.
--
Jerzy
(t) 10:50, 2005 Jan 18 (UTC)
This excellent piece of documentation satisfies me completely, and i admit to expecting more examples like a closed trail on the west side of the East Branch of the Pemi R. -- which perhaps would not be closed if there weren't such a good alternative on the east side. And of course i forgot the dictum that winter opens up the wilderness!
I prefer to imagine especially these winter attempts being undertaken by not by "an individual" but parties of four (of whom i am the least experienced [wink]), but i admit both that some soloers do so (and that not all of them are crazy).
I still like my arrangement and wording better; who should put back cardinal points (& perhaps an option or two that it seems to me i may have dropped largely by carelessness)?
--
Jerzy
(t) 18:53 & 19:00, 2005 Jan 19 (UTC)
Metsky 21:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I suggest that this article be kept in the "Mountaineering" category and dropped from the "Geography of New Hampshire" category, because there is an independent article List of mountains in New Hampshire. The immediate article covers the NE 4K and 100 Highest, which is not properly exclusively NH geography. The "List" article should be included in the "Geography of New Hampshire" category and renamed Mountains of New Hampshire so as to be consistent with the format for other geographical features. It can refer to the 4K Footers article and peaks appropriately marked as listed, but could also include others, such as Clay (er, Reagan), Jim, and smaller peaks such as Monadnock. Thoughts? FrostHeaves 03:01, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
There are a several cases where I'm not sure if peaks on the list should be considered two separate mountains or two summits on one mountain.
Any thoughts? —wwoods 00:15, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
From reading this article, it would seem that this refers entirely to mountains in the USA. This doesn't seem to be stated anywhere, however, and until I read references to the AMC and New Hampshire I assumed this referred to all 4000ft. mountains *worldwide*. I'm not sure whether my interpretation is correct or not, so could somebody clarify the article? - Zepheriah ( talk) 16:18, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Moved here from article:
Unclear; it sounds to me like it refers to peakbagging in the Adirondacks, tho i'm not certain it's false about the Whites. Deserves clarification in any case.
It may be true that people do this, even tho it would multiply risks by considerably more than four. But i doubt it is verifiable, bcz i'll bet it would violate some geographic limits on hiking and camping. Let's see some verification.
--
Jerzy
(t) 10:50, 2005 Jan 18 (UTC)
This excellent piece of documentation satisfies me completely, and i admit to expecting more examples like a closed trail on the west side of the East Branch of the Pemi R. -- which perhaps would not be closed if there weren't such a good alternative on the east side. And of course i forgot the dictum that winter opens up the wilderness!
I prefer to imagine especially these winter attempts being undertaken by not by "an individual" but parties of four (of whom i am the least experienced [wink]), but i admit both that some soloers do so (and that not all of them are crazy).
I still like my arrangement and wording better; who should put back cardinal points (& perhaps an option or two that it seems to me i may have dropped largely by carelessness)?
--
Jerzy
(t) 18:53 & 19:00, 2005 Jan 19 (UTC)
Metsky 21:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I suggest that this article be kept in the "Mountaineering" category and dropped from the "Geography of New Hampshire" category, because there is an independent article List of mountains in New Hampshire. The immediate article covers the NE 4K and 100 Highest, which is not properly exclusively NH geography. The "List" article should be included in the "Geography of New Hampshire" category and renamed Mountains of New Hampshire so as to be consistent with the format for other geographical features. It can refer to the 4K Footers article and peaks appropriately marked as listed, but could also include others, such as Clay (er, Reagan), Jim, and smaller peaks such as Monadnock. Thoughts? FrostHeaves 03:01, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
There are a several cases where I'm not sure if peaks on the list should be considered two separate mountains or two summits on one mountain.
Any thoughts? —wwoods 00:15, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
From reading this article, it would seem that this refers entirely to mountains in the USA. This doesn't seem to be stated anywhere, however, and until I read references to the AMC and New Hampshire I assumed this referred to all 4000ft. mountains *worldwide*. I'm not sure whether my interpretation is correct or not, so could somebody clarify the article? - Zepheriah ( talk) 16:18, 23 March 2008 (UTC)