Talk:Andes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Andes is included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards and, if possible, stick to GFDL-compatible images.

This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information)

	This article is part of WikiProject Argentina, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to Argentine Geography. If you would like to participate, you can improve Andes, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.

	This article is part of WikiProject South America, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to South America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Andes was the collaboration of the week for the week starting on February 5, 2006. For details on improvements made to the article, see history of past collaborations.

	To-do list for Andes:	edit  · history  · watch  · refresh
Contents 1 to do 2 Etymology 3 Boldness 4 Range description 5 Lincancaur 6 puma 7 External links 8 The Andes Mountain - new name 9 Illyrian etymology 10 Agriculture [edit] to do the people and villages near the andes agriculture, economy more about geology (it's formation) maybe make a section on geography? also, a map of the andes with countries listed would be better than the current map image (i think) hard factual data of climate (annual rainfall, its effect on neighboring countries' climate) links to the relevant Neotropic Ecoregions, (e.g. the Valdivian temperate rain forests)
Priority 1 (top)

This page has been selected for the release version of Wikipedia and rated Start-Class on the assessment scale. It is in the category Geography.

I recently came across the suggestion that Mt Chimborazo at 6272 metres in Ecuador should be reclassified as the highest mountain in the world Mt Everest is 8848m. However the summit of Mt Chimborazo is apparantly 2150m further away from the centre of the earth than the summit of Everest. This apparantly anomaly being due tothe earth having an oblately spheroidal shape. Any comments on this? how old is it?

See the Measurement section under Mount Everest. The definition of "highest", at least in mountaineering terms, has always been in line with the accepted norm that Everest is the highest mountain. 6272m while a considerable altitude, cannot be seriously compared to additional difficulties of climbing the 8,000m peaks of the Himalayas. RedWolf 20:04, Feb 7, 2004 (UTC)

The Earth has the shape of an oblate spheroid due to the equatorial bulge. Heights are normally taken from the mean sea level at the location in question. Since the sea also bulges at the equator... I'd say not. — RJH 23:44, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Etymology

Is there any definitive answer as to the origin of the word Andes? I've come across information stating that it is from an indigenous word whose origin has now been lost and also a competing argument that it comes from the spanish word andinas or andines (Of this, all I have found is andinas means "related to the Andes (plural)" and andines is the French cognate of the same). The argument for this etymology is that the conquistadors, upon seeing the Incan terraces built up the mountainsides, named them after such. However, there is no such word in Spanish. Thoughts? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.106.6.82 (talk • contribs) 15:46, 30 November 2005.

Etymonline says that the word is from the Quechua language word andi meaning "high crest". --Mr. Billion 06:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

From what I understand the Spanish word "Andén" means platform (or sidewalk). Don't know the origin of that word, however.

I don't think that the word 'Andes' could have come from 'andén', because the plural for this word would be 'andenes', a word very different from Andes. According to Spanish chroniclers, the word for the mountains came from the Quechua language, and the word wasn't even 'Andes', but it was 'Antis', and every chronicler used the same word (They never used 'Andes' until many years later after the conquest). The Spanish didn't use that word for the mountains at the beginning (Check for Inca Garcilaso de la Vega and other chroniclers). Before the Spanish arrived, in Cusco and other Quechua speakers used the word 'Anti' to refer to people who lived in the highland and lowland forests and jungles to the east of the mountains (They used the words 'Anti Runa' - 'People from Anti' or simply "Antikuna", kuna for plural). The word 'Antisuyu' doesn't exist for nothing. I think people from the coast called people from the highlands 'Anti' as well (They were to the east of them), and in my Quechua dictionary it says that Anti means 'east'. Then the Spanish started using the word Antis as a plural of Anti (Again, check for Garcilaso and other chroniclers.) The word only derived to Andes a long time after that, to refer to all the mountains and some highland forests in these mountains.

This isn't my Quechua dictionary, but it's a reference Quechua Dictionary

It's in Spanish. In Anti it says: Anti: Andes\ Anti: East. Andean eastern land\ Anti runa: Eastern man.

TaikunNozomu 07:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Boldness

I have had this article on my watchlist for ages, intending at some point to try to rewrite it. But I've decided it would be far, far more work to try and get that 1911 prose into something useful than it would be to simply start again. The notice at the top stating that the article's geology is 100 years past its use by date was just embarassing! We can do much much better than that. Worldtraveller 16:06, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Good move. I've been thinking about doing something with the archaic mess, but just never got around to it. Now have room for a good article - someday :-) Vsmith 16:25, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Excellent! Never liked that 1911 guff - MPF 18:19, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Range description

"To the north this coastal chain continues in small ridges or isolated hills along the Pacific Ocean as far as Venezuela, always leaving the same valley more or less visible to the west of the western great chain." This comment is rather strange, it should be checked. In any case, the portion of the range that goes into Venezuela it's an extention of the Oriental Range, and it is not a continuation of Chile's coastal range. I am also unsure that the whole range can simply be split into two main parallel running sub ranges.

Dycotiles 17:01, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lincancaur

A mountain called Lincancaur has been listed in the Argentina section. Its height is claimed to be 6620 m, in the province of Salta, on some websites. But I cannot find it on any up to date lists, nor can I find anything over 6,600 m in Salta except Llullailaco. Has it been confused with Licancabur (5,916 m), which is on or near the Chile/Bolivia border but near to the Argentine province of Salta, and grossly inflated? Viewfinder 16:06, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Probably. Googling "Lincancaur" gives 39 hits, and they look like they were copied from a single (erroneous) source. "Licancabur" gets 73500 results, and it's a volcano on the Bolivia/Chile border. Danyg 04:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Could be, but the official site gobierno electronico lists it as good. Don't know how can be check it. Mariano(t/c) 18:22, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I have checked the above link and despite being official, it does not appear to have been been updated from any recently researched source. It has 6,800 m for Tupungato which has been discredited for some time, and the Bonete and Galán elevations are also seriously at odds with modern and reliable SRTM data. SRTM data also shows nothing in Salta over 6,500m except Llullaillaco. See Talk: List of mountains in Argentina for an ongoing discussion. Viewfinder 19:05, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] puma

I want puma information

Perhaps you would like to do some research and add some puma information yourself. Viewfinder 01:37, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External links

There is no need for the external links that I have been deleting. The information is contained in the site in English that is already linked. (If this were Spanish wikipedia, then it would be different). Moreover, the site that I deleted supports 6882m for Monte Pissis, citing John Biggar. But the Biggar publication cited has been revised, the most recent (3rd) edition supports 6795m; in early 2005 he ascended Monte Pissis and measured it himself usong GPS. The measurement, which confirmed SRTM data, has been further confirmed by two more GPS measurements. Viewfinder 01:35, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

24.232.146.36, if you must continue to push an external link, you could at least:

• Tell the author of the link (are you the author??) to use the most recent English edition (3rd edition, 2005) of "A Guide for Climbers", which states very clearly that Ojos del Salado and Monte Pissis are 6893m and 6795m respectively, or stop citing this publication.
• Defend the addition of this link on this page.

Viewfinder 03:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Professional Deleter: My basic weblink is anyhow easyer to find on the searchmchine. I measured both, Ojos & Pissis. What counts is reality, not fantasy!

The above unsigned comment was added by 24.232.146.36. First, please see WP:EL about adding external links to your own sites. Second, how, and when, did you measure Ojos and Pissis? You do not appear to say this on your site, which quotes John Biggar, who measured both summits by accurate GPS in 2005 and got 6900m and 6795m. This confirmed the accuracy of SRTM data. Several other measurements have since confirmed these measurements. Viewfinder 09:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I will stop contesting the Andesargentinos link, if the elevations it quotes are updated in accordance with the latest edition (2005) of the source it quotes ("John Biggar - A Guide for climbers"). Viewfinder 06:44, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

or, if the site author must continue to support 6882m for Monte Pissis, then change the peak heights source credit to some other authority, which still supports that elevation. Viewfinder 07:14, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Andes Mountain - new name

Hello - In my opinion prefixing an article title with "the" is both non-encyclopedic and confusing; few people are likely to type "the" in the search box. At a minimum it should be "Andes Mountains", as we are referring to a huge chain of mountains, not one single mountain. Cheers Geologyguy 19:28, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Oppose move. After some discussion, the name "Himalayas" appeares to have stuck. Plain "Andes" has always been OK with me. It is also used on Spanish Wikipedia. "The Andes Mountain" sounds like a single mountain. Also the name change was carried out unilaterally, without discussion on this page. Therefore I will revert it. Viewfinder 19:36, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Illyrian etymology

Removed Illyrian and Balkan stuff from etymology. Seems based on a book by John Wilkes, The Illyrians - haven't seen the book, but it doesn't seem the place for such speculations or whatever. Take the subject up on the Quechua and/or Aymara language talk pages. I see no reference to it there. Vsmith 11:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Agriculture

Question regarding the Agriculture section: the section, speaking of Inka agriculture, states that, "Maize and barley were important crops for these people." Well, no, barley wasn't an important Inka crop, seeing as how it was a Eurasian crop and didn't get introduced until the 16th century. I was going to edit this, but I didn't know what the author meant. Did you mean that barley became an important crop post-Conquest? I don't know that this is true, but considering that it's a crop that can tolerate the cold and altitude it wouldn't surprise me. Or did you mean to say "maize and quinoa," which was an important Inka crop? If anyone knows the answer to these questions, I would appreciate it. Thanks. --Raulpascal 21:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)