|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Those darn bots
Is there a way to stop all of these bots from "fixing" the French interwiki, once and for all? I don't want to have to contact each bot owner, especially since some of them are hard to get in touch with. -- Spireguy (talk) 17:45, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think they can be stopped, other than raising this behaviour in some appropriate forum (I think there is a committee somewhere which approves bots).
On the other hand, I must admit that this article's link to the French Wikipedia is not very informative — fr:Sommet doesn't cover what the other languages cover, but simply explains the concept in one sentence. So, in a way, the bot is not totally wrong here, but I still believe this is an editorial decision which must not be made by a bot. Regards, Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Zenith is a synonym?
According to this article, "zenith" is a synonym for summit, and the link to Zenith_(topography) redirects back to here.
I studied geology, and later surveying at university, and currently work at a national hydrographic office, and have never heard zenith used in this manner. Nor have I heard nadir used in the manner described at Nadir_(topography).
In technical useage, I have only ever heard them used to mean either the point directly above/below an observer or instrument (e.g. a boat, satellite, surveyor, etc), or the direction vertically upwards/downwards from the observer (plus the specific astronomical meanings given in zenith and nadir.
- I believe it is an American usage. Yours aye, Buaidh (talk) 13:38, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I'm a yank, and I've never heard zenith used as a synonym for summit. The top of a mountain is always either peak or summit. Sometimes "peak" can be used to refer to the whole mountain. "Zenith" is either the imaginary point overhead or a brand of TV. FWIW, I minored in geology in college. Wschart (talk) 19:21, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Can anyone who knows this stuff clear up some confusion?
If the top of a mountain is shaped like the letter "M" and one tip is about 200m taller than the other, then according to this article, it wouldn't qualify as a separate mountain. But the article also states that it's not just about the height difference ("topographic prominence"), but also about the distance between the tips ("topographic isolation"). The problem is that the article doesn't say how far the other tip has to be to qualify as a separate mountain.
- An example of what I mean: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Elbrus_North_195.jpg How far would those summits have to be from each-other to be counted as separate mountais?
- I added the third column (with question marks) to the little table.