Talk:Taconic Mountains

message: A map would be a Good Thing.  The schematic map in the Catskills article actually shows the Taconic range (in relation to others in the region). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.80.26.121 (talk) 20:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added that map. It is a bit overpoweringly large in relation to the relatively short text of this article. Feel free to shrink the map's thumbnail, or better yet, expand the text! Pfly 21:39, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Map request

message: I've added a Taconic Mountains category and a number of articles about peaks within the range. If anyone has photos, that would be great. --Pgagnon999 (talk) 17:25, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: photos & cat

message: :Several contiguous parks and other areas including New York's Harriman State Park comprise 100,000+ acres of "unfragmented forest"  --- or "forest habitat."
:R.I. Governor Donald L. Carcieri says: "We have an area which spans western Rhode Island and Eastern Connecticut that encompasses 200 square miles of forest land. As the largest unfragmented forest between..." blabla etc.[]
:There's a nearly endless list of "unfragmented forest" areas "between Maine and Virginia" that are substantially or even vastly larger than the southern Taconics, which is "one of the largest?" 
:Why not say one of the largest "in Southern New England?" That would at least have some borderline credibility by omitting various obvious areas of Pennsylvania, Hudson/Jersey Highlands, Jersey Pine Barrens, the Catskills, Shawangunks, Vermont and New Hampshire.
Calamitybrook (talk) 23:22, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Mohonk Preserve = 6,000 acres + Minnewaska State Park, 23,600 acres + Sam's Point 4,600 = 33,200 acres. These areas are contiguous.
Calamitybrook (talk) 17:28, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: It's hyperbole

message: :Since southern Taconics are verifiably NOT "one of the largest unfragmented forests between Maine and Virginia," I've changed text to read "...among the largest unfragmented forests of the region..." though there are clearly numerous larger areas in the Catskills, Shawangunks, southern Vermont -- etc.
:Also added that it "includes substantial additional forest acreage that is presently 'unprotected' " apart from 14,000 acres listed.
Calamitybrook (talk) 20:57, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: changed

message: :Added brief section on federal conservation program, which could be somewhat expanded based on the source I've provided. Also added some stuff on middle parts of Taconics in Berkshire County. The previous writing short-changed this region.
:Also, am wondering if article may suffer in general from mention of too many hilltops. I've added several myself. But if a reader is really interested, they'd be much better served in this regard by merely consulting a good map. I don't have a certain and clear  personal opinion in this regard, but despite keen interest, I find the article in places is tedious and somewhat uninformative.
Calamitybrook (talk) 04:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Forest Legacy, Etc. 

message: :Article is assessd a "stub" in three different categories.
:Not currently accurate.
Calamitybrook (talk) 01:13, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessed

message: Mt. Greylock is not a part of the Taconic Range.  It is a distinct geologic formation, and is more appropriately classified as a continuation of the Green Mountains. Wikipedia ought to fix this error. Thanks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.34.33.219 (talk) 19:11, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, Mt. Greylock is indeed Taconic; see references for details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.147.66.106 (talk) 15:35, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  about Mt. Greylock 

message: :Is a name recently coined by a private land conservation agency during past decade or so as a sort of "branding strategy" for their (laudable) particular purposes, which are much akin to marketing.
:Despite recent acceptance by USGS, the term has no historical legitimacy or significance or wider current cultural acceptance.
:The earlier (& widely accepted) names for the  various topographic features lumped together with this somewhat irrational term should in my view, prevail.
Calamitybrook (talk) 20:20, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Regardless of how you feel or what the history is, the term for the feature has been officially accepted. It's also used locally, and has been in use by other printed sources. Since the article is about the landform, leave it as it is or argue with the USBGN, or bring it up on the Wiki mountain page RE: naming conventions for natural features. The issue you are disputing goes deeper than the simple naming of this ridge.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.147.66.106 (talk) 21:59, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Yokun Ridge

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Taconic Mountains. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100530164305/http://www.dec.ny.gov/environmentdec/18895.html to http://www.dec.ny.gov/environmentdec/18895.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:07, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Substituted at 07:32, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: bennington is a county in VT  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.91.133.185 (talk) 18:41, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  benntion  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Taconic Mountains. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111014034322/http://gis.wwfus.org/wildfinder/ to http://gis.wwfus.org/wildfinder/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081121193650/http://www.amc4000footer.org/ne100full.htm to http://www.amc4000footer.org/ne100full.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061230205730/http://www.vtfishandwildlife.com/library/Maps/Wildlife%20Management%20Areas/Rutland%20District/Bird%20Mountain%20WMA.pdf to http://www.vtfishandwildlife.com/library/Maps/Wildlife%20Management%20Areas/Rutland%20District/Bird%20Mountain%20WMA.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070629101904/http://www.bnrc.net/mrsid/bin/show.pl?client=southtaconic&image=SouthTaconic.sid&levels=7&originx=0&originy=0&fullheight=4799&fullwidth=2907&lastlevel=3&level=4&size=2 to http://www.bnrc.net/mrsid/bin/show.pl?client=southtaconic&image=SouthTaconic.sid&levels=7&originx=0&originy=0&fullheight=4799&fullwidth=2907&lastlevel=3&level=4&size=2
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:12, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: I've been editing this article, adding nearly a half-dozen sources, slightly reorganizing & re-writing, and removing a few bits that were redundant or digressive. Apparently robots sent out messages of alarm. If a human wants to engage, please do so here. 35.10.217.37 (talk) 21:20, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robot watchers? 

message: Dana endorsed Emmons' theory according to "book of the Berkshires," (1886), which quotes a local and contemporary newspaper account of a lecture Dana gave in Pittsfield Mass.
In a long article by Dana published in 1888, he gives a rather technical account of the history of the science on the question over a period of about 50 years. He seems to concede much of Emmons' ideas but --- I think -- dismisses the entire matter as an obsolete issue. It's too subtle for me. I've attached the article under "Further Reading." It can be accessed electronically via scanned material (hathaway, I think).  Try google or a good library. 35.8.218.249 (talk) 21:19, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dana sourcing (geology)