Talk:Hyperion (tree)

message: The longer Hyperion stays hidden, the better. Unfortunately, it will likely be found and mapped by someone who will publish the location, and from then on, say good by to Hyperion. The greatest disease Hyperion faces, is mankind. If you who are skeptical, can't believe in a 380-ft tree, Take a big gulp, because the Redwood has likely reached 400 in past ages. It is a statistical likelihood that taller trees than Hyperion have existed in the Redwoods, considering we only have 2 or 3 % of the original Old Growth left. 
--71.222.40.209 03:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is NOT a forum. Please make sure all information on this talk page pertains to improving the wikipedia page. Now, that said, I can't believe the mods aren't allowing the coordinates of the tree to be posted. Additionally, real photos of the tree exist and are available without copyright, yet the mods also will not allow a real photo of the tree. This is blatant censorship and am honestly a bit disappointed in wikipedia for doing this 2601:18E:101:BAAD:691C:7B4B:D431:4DC0 (talk) 20:22, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hyperion's location 

message: 502 m³ is not equal to 18,600 cubic feet, but rather 17,728 cubic feet.  If nobody can look up the citation and fix this, we'll need to remove it entirely.  --Doradus (talk) 04:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong wood volume 

message: I've placed this under geography, although it could go under biology as well. There appears to be a long-waged edit war on this page with regards to the coordinates for Hyperion. I've located a past discussion regarding the need to cite coordinates, as anybody can verify them by going to the location. IMO, this is equivalent to a photograph claiming to be of a certain location.
Other arguments raised in this particular topic are that the park services or discoverer don't want want the location made publicly available due to fears of vandalism (which is not backed by a source).
Should coordinates be included? Do they, and by extension all of the million or so coordinates on en.wiki, require citation? Do the opinions of the park services hold any weight? Most importantly, why do you take that stance? - Floydian τ ¢ 18:00, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: There isn't a biology RfC category - valid categories are listed at WP:RFC#Categories. But if you feel that something like Maths, science, and technology would apply, you can add  either before or after the existing , but it must be before the  otherwise Legobot won't pick it up. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:17, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

text: I think it comes to the same thing anyway. If the information were available in reliable sources then Wikipedia's inclusion would be unlikely to have a significant effect on the accessibility of the tree. CapitalSasha ~ talk 04:13, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point Cesdeva (talk) 06:03, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC - Coordinates for Hyperion 

message: Why do we not have a picture? Is this tree hiding or not existing? Pics or it did not happen! 2A02:8388:1641:8380:15C2:A3F1:9A28:71D9 (talk) 16:52, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: There are pictures of this tree, yes. Most, however, are in copyrighted materials.Ryoung122 06:30, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Alexa says Hyperion is 115.8m tall. 82.9.135.72 (talk) 16:09, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That's from the rounded imperial measurement of 380 feet (115.824m). - Floydian τ ¢ 22:37, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

text: The consensus from the RfC (above) is that famousredwoods.com is not an reliable source. Is there another source for the latest height? — hike395 (talk) 10:12, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Height of hyperion tree