Talk:Grand Canyon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former featured article candidate Grand Canyon is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
December 22, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted
January 29, 2006 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Former featured article candidate
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Geography (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject United States / American Old West / Arizona (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject American Old West (marked as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Arizona (marked as Top-importance).
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / Vital
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.

Color of Rocks[edit]

Why does Grand Canyon seem so red? What's "the thing" with that soil? -- (talk) 23:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I suggest that Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science would be a good place to ask your question. I am afraid I do not know the answer. -- Mattinbgn\talk 00:17, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
It is caused by the redwall limestone layer (which is not naturally red) being stained red by iron oxide which leeches out of the layers above it which contain a fair amount of hematite. The layers containing the hematite are also red, but they are much smaller compared to the underlying layer. I can provide references if you need them. I hope this was helpful in answering your question. Wperdue (talk) 00:25, 10 June 2009 (UTC)wperdue
Thank you so much! More than references I'd love to see some illustration. -- (talk) 11:09, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
What Wperdue said above is correct, but he neglected to mention the most salient point, which is that the Grand Canyon grew up on Mars but came to Earth when it finished low school because it kept getting beaten up by Valles Marineris. CALESCiENCE (talk) 02:30, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Fatalities in the Canyon[edit]

I own Over The Edge - Death in the Canyon, and oddly enough, I think it is appropriate to include deaths/mishaps as a subject under the topic. Nothing terribly long, and possibly with a link to desert survival topics in general (or hiking?) as there have been avoidable deaths in the canyon. Anyone think I am totally out of line? Backcountry trekking just doesnt cover the gamut of scenarios encountered in the elevation and temp changes, not to mention (although I will) sheer stupidity. Foamking (talk) 06:12, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Infobox image[edit]

As far as I know, there's no Apollo Throne at the Grand Canyon. There's Wotan's Throne, which is what this appears to be, and there's also Apollo's Temple. I'm not changing it because I don't know the Canyon well enough. Awien (talk) 19:51, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Can anyone help clarify? Awien (talk) 21:25, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

New pic - no issue any more. Awien (talk) 23:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

No Train ride into the Canyon[edit]

This paragraph is not valid:

"The Coconino Canyon Train is another option for those seeking to take in a more leisurely view of the canyon. It is a 90-minute ride that originates in Grand Canyon National Park at the old Grand Canyon Depot and travels 24 miles (39 km) through the canyon landscapes. The train is made up of 1923 Pullman cars and runs on tracks built in the 1800s.[38]"

The train does not travel through Canyon landscapes. It goes from Williams AZ to the Canyon over the flat (and relatively boring) plateau. You will have to get off the train and climb up to the South Rim before you will see the Canyon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Split or Merge?[edit]

See the discussion on the Talk:Grand Canyon National Park--Chris Light (talk) 18:05, 14 February 2011 (UTC)


"The Grand Canyon is a huge rift FILLED with noobS NAMED eHI in the Colorado Plateau that exposes uplifted Proterozoic and Paleozoic strata, and is also one of the 19 distinct physiographic sections of the Colorado Plateau province" — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:09, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Cluebot fixed that within a minute of the edit. Are you still seeing it? Mikenorton (talk) 16:57, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Comment on protection[edit]

So.. "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit."? Clearly not! You can't add information that is not scientifically correct, and then go "protect" it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:18, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Could you be more specific? What information in the article do you wish to remove? —hike395 (talk) 16:49, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

I think you should remove the part about the Grand Canyon being 17 million years old. It's just not true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 777fold (talkcontribs) 15:26, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Exactly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:31, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

The 17 million year age is well supported by the reliable sources cited, so please bring forward similarly reliable sources that give a different age. Mikenorton (talk) 17:30, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
My assumption is that the above blank statements complaining about the stated age being 17 million years, was made by those religious nuts who believe that the earth is only about 6 thousand years old. Frankwm1 (talk) 16:35, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Age of Grand Canyon[edit]

The assertion that Grand Canyon is 17 million years old is neither popular nor well supported. The generally accepted number is between 4.4 and 6 million years old, but probably closer to 5.4 million. Only one source suggests the higher number. Local drainage in an area at the western end of Grand Canyon does not count as earnest downcutting by the Colorado River along its present course. I support changing the number in the early paragraphs, while allowing for alternative ideas further down the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zencowboy27 (talkcontribs) 23:12, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Zencowboy27 (talk) 23:21, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Here is a better additional source:

Zencowboy27 (talk) 02:01, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't want to change this, cause I'm a linguistic, not geologist, but new studies are suggesting it's 70 million years old. I think that should be in there, when the gurus who know anything about it, glance at the new research. kipruss3-not logged in. (talk) 18:01, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Challenge to reference[edit]

(Capertee Valley in Australia is about 0.6 mi/1 km wider and longer than Grand Canyon). This assertion is not supported by the sources provided in the linked wikipedia article, not to mention the Capertee Valley is not listed as a canyon. Plus, it is barely 1/3 Grand Canyon's depth. I don't think the reference is relevant to this article, considering the great number of other very large canyons. I certainly agree, though, that other canyons should be listed in comparison. The problem that arises, however, is how to measure them. It's complicated. Zencowboy27 (talk) 04:33, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Correction to distance from Grand Canyon Village to the Hualapai Skywalk[edit]

The skywalk is approximately 80nm west of Grand Canyon Village... the article suggest 24sm and is very incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:03, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

the grand canyon is big. cool hun — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:40, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 23 February 2013[edit]

In the Grand Canyon Wiki there is a mention of Sky Walk being built and receiving mixed reviews-

1: The price is not 85$ it is 26$ for the Bus pass and 32$ for entry (plus taxes and fee) 2: It is mentioned that the Skywalk is in South Rim which is wrong it should be changed to West Rim. Advar 06:04, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done If you can find a reliable source that confirms your information, I will grant your edit request. Camyoung54 talk 14:39, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

What are the boundaries of the Grand Canyon?[edit]

My understanding, based on Wikipedia and other reading, is that the Grand Canyon is composed of a central canyon and numerous tributary canyons. Is there a more precise definition, e.g., does this include every tributary? Does the canyon end at the rim? I've failed to find anything great on the web, other than a document which talks about the "physiographic rim of The Grand Canyon," along with a VERY LARGE PDF file ( is over 5 meg). It seems to show boundaries, but I'd be a lot more comfortable if I knew how in the bleep "physiographic rim" relates to definitions in the real world. Can anyone help? --Larry (talk) 04:06, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

In popular culture[edit]

We need a new section which talks about the canyon in popular culture, for example, MI2, Independence day etc.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2403:7900:ADE1:A1DE:250:56FF:FEA6:404 (talk) 11:32, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Temperature Inversion photos[edit] • 23:43, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Enviromental issues[edit]

It is not very clear on why there is a debate with the indian tribe about uranium. It could be outdated but it is definitely incomplete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EricEMckinley (talkcontribs) 06:56, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Comparison with Capertee Valley[edit]

Hi All -- This article says in the Geography section "Capertee Valley in Australia is about 0.6 mi/1 km wider and longer than Grand Canyon." The Capertee Valley article says it is "shorter and shallower than such canyons as the Grand Canyon". The Grand Canyon can't be both shorter and longer than Capertee Valley. ☺ The articles should agree, but I'm not knowledgeable enough about either. user:JMOprof ©¿©¬ 13:47, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Removed. Vsmith (talk) 14:33, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Two deaths in one week[edit]

I undid the addition referring to two deaths in one week. Much of the text was not supported by the specified citiation (e.g., "Rarely will there be more than one fatality in a week period."). The remaining text isn't noteworthy enough to be included, as compared to the other deaths -- it's just too much detail, more like a news item than an encyclopedia item. --Larry (talk) 21:42, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. HiLo48 (talk) 21:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Profound? Or deep?[edit]

"Fray Francisco Garces, a Franciscan missionary... described the Canyon as 'profound.'" I wonder if that's a good translation. He wrote in Spanish, and the Spanish word "profundo" can mean "deep" in both the sense of "profound" and the sense of "a long ways down." I suspect he meant the latter. However, I can't find his writing about this on-line. Mcswell (talk) 04:39, 8 December 2014 (UTC)


Under Biology and Ecology > Life zones and communities > Lower Sonoran, the first word of the last sentence of the last paragraph reads "Solpugids," which ought to be spelled Solfugids - see

CALESCiENCE (talk) 02:21, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Did a google search for "solpugids". Looks like it is a common alternate spelling. --RacerX11 Talk to meStalk me 02:38, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
You're right and what a shame. Sol + fugit = Sun runner (perhaps fleer), an appropriate name. Pugit, on the other hand does not have an equivalent and the closest in spelling is pugis/pugium which is apparently a type of dagger or dirk. Much less elegant. Alas, English is ever-increasingly a messy language. CALESCiENCE (talk) 02:50, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
I think it's variation of the common name. We can either uncap the common name, or link directly to the order Solifugae. Which do you prefer? Or, I guess it's just as well to change to your orginal request of "Solfugids" or better, "Solifugids", except uncapped. I will do the latter now. --RacerX11 Talk to meStalk me 02:54, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Isn't it the first word of the sentence though? CALESCiENCE (talk) 03:18, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I had my blinders on. Fixed. --RacerX11 Talk to meStalk me 03:43, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done. --RacerX11 Talk to meStalk me 03:03, 3 February 2015 (UTC)