Talk:Cordillera del Paine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cordillera del Paine article.
Article policies
WikiProject Mountains
 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)
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance to WikiProject Mountains on the project's importance scale.
If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments.
Chile Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Chile; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (comments)
??? This article has not yet been prioritized.


Contents

[edit] Page move

(from WP:RM)

[edit] Towers of Paine → Torres del Paine

  • Much better known by their Spanish name, even when being discussed in English. Torres del Paine has a history of just 2 redirects. sjorford 13:14, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Disagree. Many accounts in English call them "Towers". In English, "Torres del Paine" is used primarily to refer the national park of that name, whereas "Towers of Paine" more often refers to the mountains themselves, as you can see by a Google search. Gdr 18:09, 2004 Nov 1 (UTC)
    • Agree with the move request. 16,500 Google hits for "Towers of Paine" discussing either the mountains or the Natl. Park. 71,600 Google hits for "Torres del Paine", again covering either the mountains or the Natl. Park. There were still 37,600 Google hits when an English-only search on "Towers of Paine" was done. It is very clear that "Torres del Paine" is the most common usage, even in English. gK 03:57, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • Agree with the move. The Spanish name is the one I've coma across most; if given in English form, it is as often or more often as the Pillars of Paine, not the Towers of Paine - MPF 18:51, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • One-all (well, 2-1 if we count the nominator). Would anyone else like to comment on the proposed move before it is done or the request deleted? -- ALoan (Talk) 11:38, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Cordillera del Paine → Torres del Paine National Park

  • After reviewing more in depth the English Wikipedia, I determined that there are not more articles on Torres del Paine, hence I think "Cordillera del Paine" should be moved to "Torres del Paine National Park". The Paine Massif is the main attraction of the park, but the park is much more than that. Although given the importance of the "Cordillera del Paine", it may be convenient to create a new article on "Torres del Paine National Park", preserve the present article and fix the redirects. Jespinos 06:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
I have no objection to the move as stated, so long as "National Park" is included in the title, but it was I who moved the article from "Torres del Paine" and would be opposed to moving it back. There is much more there than the actual towers. I do not think a separate article is needed, but if the article is to be extended to the entire park then it may have to be amended. Viewfinder 10:47, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Agree with the move. This article talks primarily about the national park, and should not be redirected to "Cordillera del Paine" that is just a geologic formation inside the park. Cordillera del Paine should then also have its own article or section. Dentren | Talk 03:20, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Summit elevations

(transferred from User_Talk:Jespinos)

I would like to have accurate elevations for these summits; official Chilean IGM maps show no elevations, and the most often given elevations, especially that of Paine Grande, are not compatible with photographic evidence. Any information you can supply would be greatly appreciated. Viewfinder 04:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I am an amateur in these matters. In any case, I can give you some useful info. See the following link: Summits in border zones. That is official info, although not necessarily true. Recent maps and the most of the Chilean websites give 4,058m for Cerro San Valentin. In relation to Paine Grande, almost all the sources give 3,050m. See this article:[1] and this another: Rolando Garibotti. Jespinos 23:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for these interesting links. The Garibotti photo from Paine Grande summit is particularly interesting, despite the low resolution. Assuming it shows Fortaleza in the centre (I am sure about this, what else could it be?) and the Torres on the right, then the heights that the border zones link gives, PG 3050m, F 2681m, Torre Sur 2850m, cannot all be correct. Consider the geometry, if they were all correct, the Torres would appear higher than Fortaleza, which they clearly do not. I am not alone in claiming the Torres are only 2500m, see summitpost. It seems to me that the 2,850m Torre Sur elevation was estimated on the basis of 3,050m for Paine Grande, and that the 3050m claim is at the root of the other errors in the Paine range. You are right that this is given by almost all sources, but perhaps they all copy each other. Also, my ChIGM 1:50,000 map of Cerro Macá (section XI) has no summit elevation or topography, and SRTM clearly shows that it is no more than 2,300 m. The northern Chile data looks good; here the IGM maps are in excellent agreement with SRTM, but I think that some of the Patagonian summits are in need of a new, modern survey. Viewfinder 07:05, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Evidently, most are copies of data from a few sites or sources. It never pretended to be a proof of true elevation. Jespinos 20:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
In the next photos, you can see the Cordillera del Paine from a different angle, near Monte Balmaceda. I calculate that Cerro Paine Grande is, approximately, at least 3 percent higher than Cerro Paine Chico and about of 30 percent higher than Cuerno Principal. What is your opinion?. Jespinos 02:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

The above links are very useful, especially [2] because it shows the range through a high resolution lens from a distance, so there is less distortion. The elevations in the main article are from the latest edition of John Biggar's book. We discussed them at some length, and I think that they are fairly accurate. I agree with your calculations. Paine Grande (2750m) is shown 4% higher than Paine Chico (2650m) and 30% higher than Cuerno Principal (2100m). Readers should note that Fortaleza, Paine Chico and the Torres are 4-5km further from the viewpoint, which is 8-10%, based on the 50km distance of the sea level viewpoint. Consequently, although Paine Grande appears, in the photograph, to be 10% higher than Paine Chico, I do not think that the photographs are inconsistent with the above heights, although the error margins would be greatly reduced by GPS readings or an accurate survey. None of the above, of course, detracts from the spectacular nature of these summits. Perhaps I will see them for real some day. Viewfinder 11:48, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I found a page in which describing a recent climb on Central Tower of Paine [3], indicating indirectly an elevation of 2,550m for it. GPS is not mentioned. In the page of another expedition, completed at about the same date, is indicated 2,454m.[4] But that is the same value mentioned in a Chilean page dated 2004 [5]. Hence is not clear that it be its own calculation. Regretfully in the Chilean magazine is not given more info.Jespinos 21:41, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Via the first of the above links I found a photo taken from the Central Tower summit (at the bottom of the page), showing Paine Grande on the right. I have tried to reproduce this on Google Earth, assuming 2,500 m for the tower viewpoint. The GE terrain data (3" resolution) is based on a 2700 m PG summit. The likeness is far from perfect because of the lack of accurate topographic data, and perhaps I am proving nothing, but comparison of the images suggests that PG is not very much more than 200m higher than the viewpoint, and that earlier 2,800 m claims for the Torres were based on the 3,050 m claim for Paine Grande. Viewfinder 18:32, 25 January 2007 (UTC)