This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Pacific Cordillera (Canada) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This can also be called the Western Cordillera, but IMO there's no way Geography of the United States Pacific Mountain System should stand as-is, as physiographic regions are NOT delimited by the United States national boundary. The world DOES exist north of the 49th Parallel.....especially since the Boundary Ranges are stated as belong to the Pacific Mountain System, it's a bit odd that that article's map ends at the 49th. But there's no need for "United States Pacific Mountain System". yes, that's the name used, apparently, in the US, but it's the same mountain system as teh Pacific/Western Cordillera as it's used in Canada. These two should be merged, and the US dropped from the article title; whether it's Pacific Mountain System or Pacific Cordillera or Western Cordillera or another term (and there are others) is debatable; maybe a google-count on each of those would settle it? But I see no reason for the US article to exist independently of the Canadian one, even though the Canadian one is underwritten at the present time; it would seem that the Cordillera Occidental in Mexico is part and party of the same merge, though I haven't examined that aritcle closely and would guess it includes the Andes etc. Skookum1 ( talk) 17:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
This page should now be removed. I've gone in and updated Western Pacific Cordillera to bring some clarity to this debate. There is no precise boundary for these areas in the literature - which is why the confusion exists. I did my masters thesis on the ecology of these areas and had to read a great deal about the geology and naming conventions. It is a nightmare because even in the published literature there is no consistency - mainly due to a US bias where they cut off everything at the 49th as though the earth stops there. In creating the new and updated page I searched the terms Western Cordillera, Pacific Cordillera, and Western Pacific Cordillera in GoogleEarth Scholar and our University library. I include all name places that I was able to find in about 100 or more papers through this search. Thompsma ( talk) 23:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
in light of the lack of signatures and dates, this section's subsections have probably gotten all the attention they deserve on this talk page!
--
Jerzy•
t
23:35, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
This page was redirected there and sent to PROD, which is weird.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.66.198.171 ( talk) 10:58, 10 January 2009
The PCR article states its alternate name is Pacific Cordillera— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.66.198.171 ( talk) 10:58, 10 January 2009
That article states that this article's contents are a portion of that ones.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.66.198.171 ( talk) 10:58, 10 January 2009
I removed
leaving, after correcting unnecessary awkwardness,
I can't be sure whether what i removed refers to literal motion on geological time scale, or to figurative motion perceived by a northward-travelling observer. The latter phenomenon (perhaps reflecting just less motion separating the ranges in the north) seems obvious to the eye, so pending documentation of actual motion, i'm making it explicitly refer to the relative narrowness in the north, and awaiting verification of any motion on geo time scales.
--
Jerzy•
t
23:35, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Pacific Cordillera (Canada) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This can also be called the Western Cordillera, but IMO there's no way Geography of the United States Pacific Mountain System should stand as-is, as physiographic regions are NOT delimited by the United States national boundary. The world DOES exist north of the 49th Parallel.....especially since the Boundary Ranges are stated as belong to the Pacific Mountain System, it's a bit odd that that article's map ends at the 49th. But there's no need for "United States Pacific Mountain System". yes, that's the name used, apparently, in the US, but it's the same mountain system as teh Pacific/Western Cordillera as it's used in Canada. These two should be merged, and the US dropped from the article title; whether it's Pacific Mountain System or Pacific Cordillera or Western Cordillera or another term (and there are others) is debatable; maybe a google-count on each of those would settle it? But I see no reason for the US article to exist independently of the Canadian one, even though the Canadian one is underwritten at the present time; it would seem that the Cordillera Occidental in Mexico is part and party of the same merge, though I haven't examined that aritcle closely and would guess it includes the Andes etc. Skookum1 ( talk) 17:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
This page should now be removed. I've gone in and updated Western Pacific Cordillera to bring some clarity to this debate. There is no precise boundary for these areas in the literature - which is why the confusion exists. I did my masters thesis on the ecology of these areas and had to read a great deal about the geology and naming conventions. It is a nightmare because even in the published literature there is no consistency - mainly due to a US bias where they cut off everything at the 49th as though the earth stops there. In creating the new and updated page I searched the terms Western Cordillera, Pacific Cordillera, and Western Pacific Cordillera in GoogleEarth Scholar and our University library. I include all name places that I was able to find in about 100 or more papers through this search. Thompsma ( talk) 23:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
in light of the lack of signatures and dates, this section's subsections have probably gotten all the attention they deserve on this talk page!
--
Jerzy•
t
23:35, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
This page was redirected there and sent to PROD, which is weird.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.66.198.171 ( talk) 10:58, 10 January 2009
The PCR article states its alternate name is Pacific Cordillera— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.66.198.171 ( talk) 10:58, 10 January 2009
That article states that this article's contents are a portion of that ones.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.66.198.171 ( talk) 10:58, 10 January 2009
I removed
leaving, after correcting unnecessary awkwardness,
I can't be sure whether what i removed refers to literal motion on geological time scale, or to figurative motion perceived by a northward-travelling observer. The latter phenomenon (perhaps reflecting just less motion separating the ranges in the north) seems obvious to the eye, so pending documentation of actual motion, i'm making it explicitly refer to the relative narrowness in the north, and awaiting verification of any motion on geo time scales.
--
Jerzy•
t
23:35, 25 September 2009 (UTC)