Talk:Mount Si

message: I just added the note that NH's Mt. Monadnock also is allegedly the most-climbed in the US, as is asserted by the Monadnock State Park site, which states "Monadnock is said to be the second most frequently climbed mountain in the world, after Japan's Mt. Fuji."
The Washington tourism site asserts:
"Said to be the most-climbed peak in the United States, and the second most-hiked trail in Washington, Mount Si..."
And unfortunately, neither of these claims are sourced and are both made in the context of promoting visits to their respective mountains. 71.255.172.147 03:25, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Most-climbed"

message: The template info on this page seems rather broken.  I can see raw HTML at the beginning of the article in all browsers.  I don't know enough about the WikiProject to attempt a fix.  Ocicat 23:52, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject Mountain template

message: I'm changing "moon god" back to "moon".  As far as I can tell, "Snoqualm" is just the Snoqualmie word for moon.  I'm not comfortable with naming figures in Native American myth gods or goddesses, although Snoqualm (Moon the Transformer) is supposed to ==be responsible for the creation of the world.  Reference: http://www.historylink.org/output.cfm?file_id=281 128.95.108.147 17:14, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think being an personified incarnation of the moon qualifies as being a "god" in the same sense as the gods of greek and norse myths.  But of course it's a loaded term.  And I think the word "Snoqualm" does just mean moon, though since in the legend the mountain is supposed to be the fallen body of "Snoqualm", yet the moon itself is still in the sky, there is some differentiation between the moon itself and the character.  Thus "moon god".  Ocicat 20:09, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mythology

message: User:Howcheng put the correct tag on the photo over at Commons, I just misunderstood the original web site. Sorry for any confusion. -- hike395 06:32, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  My reversion of the pic was incorrect 

message: There should be a merge between Little Si and this article because people familiar with Mount Si might not be as familiar with Little Si as with what they're already familiar with. Both of them are somewhat connected to each other in terms of similarities and location. JustN5:12 23:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I vote against.  I live in North Bend, near the base of these two mountains.  Although geologically, Mount Si and Little Si were originally the same mountain, they are really two distinctly different mountains now.  A narrow slot divides the two.  Mount Si is known for its most popular hiking trail.  Little Si, although it has a beautiful hiking trail up to it, Little Si is really known for its mountain climbing area.  Combining the two would confuse tourists that come to North Bend and use Wikipedia to familiarize themselves with the area.  One can use a See also link for the purpose of pointing someone to the other mountain. Kgrr 01:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, if THAT were to be clarified in the article, then maybe it wouldn't be as big of a deal. This is why I recommended this merge in the first place: nothing has ever been mentioned of Little Si's huge distinctions from Mount Si, and at this rate, nothing will. JustN5:12 02:13, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[Little Si]] into this article 

message: Mount See?  Mount Sigh?  Mount Sih?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.231.59.254 (talk) 19:27, August 26, 2007 (UTC) 
:Mount sigh 98.203.237.75 (talk) 14:58, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: Locals pronounce it with the long i as in "sigh", or more portantly, as the "si" in Josiah.
The one thing I'm not sure about is the "45 minute drive from Seattle". The closest highway accesses are at exits 31 and 32 on I-90. So, if you live near I-90 and you go when there's not a lot of traffic, it could take as little as 30 minutes. But, someone who lives downtown and tries to head to North Bend at 5PM on Friday, it could easily be 90 minutes. Is it really desirable to approximate distances with time? It feels to me like the use of "packages" and "cans" in recipes...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcell59 (talk • contribs) 23:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation and "distance" 

message: Prominence is indicated at 247 feet?  What?   Although the peak is only 4K' or so, it's eye-catching and impressive because it rises from a valley floor that's only about 450'.  And mountain appears pretty much standalone in the view from well-traveled I-90 nearby.  Is there a reason for this shorting?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.159.29.246 (talk) 21:19, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prominence 

message: The term ″plate volcano″ seems to be unusual. Maybe, a shield volcano is meant? --Vorwald (talk) 13:30, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oceanic Plate Volcano