Talk:Lechuguilla Cave

message: The broadcast date given in the article is for the US broadcast - the episode was broadcast approximately one year earlier in the UK. When noting a broadcast date, the earliest date broadcast should be used.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.205.0.21 (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

message: I negated a sentence which seemed to me to be incorrect.  Original was "The claim in the BBC documentary series Planet Earth that these bacteria do not derive any energy from the sun is correct, in that sulfur-oxidizing bacteria found in the cave use atmospheric oxygen (derived from sunlight-driven photosynthesis) as an electron acceptor...".  If the bacteria use oxygen derived from photosynthesis, then the claim that they do not derive any energy from the sun is INcorrect.  Hence my edit ("correct" --> "incorrect").  I hope my edit is right, but feel free to correct me. Mcswell (talk) 01:35, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Negation added

message: exact wording of most of the article stolen from government site
http://www.nps.gov/archive/cave/lech.htm
I accredit AnonMoos who chooses what stays and what doesnt in Wikipedia.
I move we ban Wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Elijah Michael (talk • contribs) 15:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I put a citation on each of the paragraphs taken from that site. At this point I am assuming the copying is allowed because it is from a work published by an agency of the US government that is in the public domain. Burlywood 18:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

text: On examination, that National Park site says that any material which is not specifically copyrighted is in the public domain. So, it's ok to post in Wiki. However they haven't updated that page in three and a half years, and a lot of exploration has happened since then. I was hoping the Wiki article would be more up-to-date! Alpha Ralpha Boulevard 01:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: stolen dialogue

message: Is there any information regarding the legitimacy of the current image from the BBC? I suspect it is not licensed although I doubt the BBC would seek to have it removed. We should try to find other images that may be used with more legal saftey.~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rob cowie (talk • contribs) 
:Well it's a fair use image from a TV program. If you have a non-fair use image that would be better of course. I looked around and could not find any, so I took a screenshot from the program and uploaded it. I think this is ok, if it's not then I'll remove it again. jacoplane 22:39, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To clarify, the fair use disclaimer states the image can be used "for identification and critical commentary on the station ID or program and its contents". Since the Lechuguilla Cave is a large part of the contents of the program I assumed it would be ok to use it in this article. jacoplane 22:45, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

text: That's cool. I agree with you. what I should have asked is, does US Copyright Law apply to images whose copyright belongs to non-US entities? Rob cowie 18:31, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: Hi there
Does anyone know how Lechugilla Cave got it's name?
* Good point. Addition made under Place Names. Ian mckenzie 23:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cave name

message: Why was this article tagged as using weasel words? Aside from the descriptions of the individual "rooms" I see very little content that isn't cold facts. --JD79 17:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was wondering about that as well, but if you read the entire article you do find more than one passage that seems to want to add subjective "wow-appeal" to the subject (I think that goes to what is meant by weasel-words). Some examples: "it is most famous for ...", "one of the world's most exciting cave explorations", "one of the finest known caves on the planet", "never-before-seen beauty", "A fantastic array of rare speleothems", "Scientific exploration has been exciting ...". The article probably just needs some pruning! - Bevo 20:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Weasel Words?

message: *Little Lake Lechuguilla - This was the second significant body of water found in the cave and was particularly important due to its location along a trade route.
Does "Trade Route" mean something different in spelunking than its usual meaning? P.S. I wouldn't want to see the descriptions over-edited, the names fit an American West tradition of humorous descriptive place names. It should be intelligible, though. Cuvtixo (talk) 17:43, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Trade Route?

message: So What? In my opinion the long section about place names adds nothing to the article. The article would be better without it. "Be brief." - Kurt Vonnegut.Senor Cuete (talk) 22:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur with Senor Cuete. This section also does not cite verifiable sources for where this info comes from. It may be original research. I tagged it as an unreferenced section. Others may want to weigh in on weather this is truly OR or not. In any case, it does seem much too long and unencyclopedic for Wikepedia. It seems to be good info that one would expect to find in a source document that the WP article might reference. N2e (talk) 15:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I wouldn't read it even if I encountered it while reading a book like Lechuguilla Jewell of the Underground. It's not interesting and it's overkill in the wiki article. The cave is horribly over-named anyway. I vote to nuke it entirely.Senor Cuete (talk) 02:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I deleted it again today. It sux. Senor Cuete (talk) 18:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Place Names

message: According to: http://www.caverbob.com/usalong.htm this is the 4th longest and not the 3rd longest cave in the US.
Is there a source for the statement in Wikipedia or should this be changed?
Daniel (01 September 2009) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.178.55.217 (talk) 12:31, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Thanks for the reference. WTucker (talk) 13:47, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Third Longest?

message: I keep expecting the US National Park to be updated with new estimates of length, but it's been years. Has exploring stopped? 98.210.208.107 (talk) 03:27, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope. Takes time. Alfie↑↓© 10:27, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Current events

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lechuguilla Cave. 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/20051119165521/http://giantcrystals.strahlen.org/america/lechuguilla.htm to http://giantcrystals.strahlen.org/america/lechuguilla.htm
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) 13:32, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: What these guys did in exploring Oz was great but why does it merit special mention while other specific explorations don't? This paragraph should go. Senor Cuete (talk) 17:42, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Derek Bristol, et.al 

message: Although obviously the linked articles are valid, the comment "The claim in the BBC documentary series Planet Earth that these bacteria do not derive any energy from the sun is incorrect," seems disingenuous at best, because clearly it means direct energy from the sun, and pointing out that atmospheric oxygen generated elsewhere by photosynthesis is somewhat misleading. The cave obviously isn't a closed system, but the claim in the documentary is still valid.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.16.2.29 (talk) 07:45, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  BBC reference