Talk:Mountain hut

message: obwohl das Bild wirklich schön ist, was gibt es zu der Artikel?  Wir haben schon zwei andere Bilder - zwei Bilder, die besser Bilder von Hütten sind - und dieses zeigt nichts neu.  Es gibt fast genauso viel Bild als es Text gibt, also vielleicht ist es besser dieses Bild zu löschen.
Can some better European than I, please render this in English :-(   Bob aka Linuxlad 20:45, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I can, i'm the one who originally wrote it.  its probably unnecessary in german, but im spending a year in Germany and was thinking in German as i wrote it (having just gotten back from school).  It's in response to the reversion back to the three-picture page.  It's important to ask, what does the third picture add to the article?  Sure, it's a great picture...but we already have to pictures that not only suffice, they are better pictures of the huts themselves.  This one adds nothing with regards to the article that isn't already shown in the other two.  And right now, theres about as much image as there is text, so maybe it is better to get rid of this third picture.jfg284 23:30, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If a picture needs to be removed, then it's the Australian one. The building shown there seems not to be an actual Alpine hut, as it apparently doesn't offer any sleeping places for mountaineers (it's obviously too small). Besides, it does not seem to be located in Alpine surroundings, but simply in some forest on a hill (at least that's what it looks like). I originally added the Payerhütte picture because it was available in commons at that time, and I thought it was very typical for a large hut in the Eastern Alps. It's also typical for the stunning setting huts sometimes are located in, which itself is highly relavant to the topic of the article. The French hut is much less typical in my experience because of the unusual architecture. Please also have a look at the German page which has a list of huts and a lot more pictures. Martg76 11:18, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: aber es gibt auch ein wichtige Frage zu stellen: 

message: I have tagged the paragraph on UK/Irish mountain huts with , because it seems contradictionary.  On one hand, it offers the converted "unwardened" huts as comparable to bothies; on another, it states they're generally not accessible to passersby.  What are they, then?  Conserved houses for emergency shelter?  This needs to be clarified. Digwuren 14:50, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Er, Locked but bookable facilities (can't see why you made the last leap).  Bob aka Linuxlad 15:21, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction? 

message: I suggest merge to the Alpine hut article. Alpine hut refer not only to the Alps but also to same buildings in other regions. This can be seen e.g. by the interwikis there. It is unnecessary to have two articles about the same thing. - Darwinek (talk) 09:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur, but both should be merged into a new article "Mountain hut", which has got most hits on Google.Mountain hut 193,000 Mountain shelter 147,000 Mountain hostel 63,000 Alpine hut 46,500 Tourist shelter 784--Svetovid (talk) 09:43, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I also noticed several times before mountain hut is more frequently used. - Darwinek (talk) 09:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Agreed. Alpine hut is specific to the Alpine region, mountain huts are more general. I'd have only one final comment: there are two different de wiki articles on those: :de:Alpenvereinshütte and :de:Bergbaude. Perhaps somebody with knowledge of German could read them, see if they indeed support merger and try to merge them on de wiki too?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  11:36, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If nothing happens, there is still no problem. We have dual interwikis on many pages on en wiki. - Darwinek (talk) 11:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger

message: The image :Image:Elizabeth Parker hut.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --11:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I received email permission from the Alpine Club of Canada to post this image from an authorized representative of that organization.  I'll ask the folks at the ACC to submit their permission in a format that WP finds more authoritative/acceptable.   ◉ ghoti 01:45, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Elizabeth Parker hut.jpg

message: The picture examples of mountain huts do all belong to Europe and North America. In order to reflect a more worldwide perspective we would need a more balanced selection of pictures. I thin that 2 or 3 pictures of mountain huts in the Alps are enought. Examples of places not represented include:
*Russia
*Japan
*Nepal
*Africa
*South America
*Middle East
Dentren | Talk 22:23, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone has some pictures of mountain huts in the places mentioned above, I'm certain that they would be gladly included in the article. I don't favour deleting those already included in the absence of a convincing case for doing so.--Yeti Hunter (talk) 07:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Globalize

message: The 1904 shelter at Carter Notch was not the AMC's first hut in the White Mountains, nor is it still in use. (The existing hut at Carter dates to 1914.) The first AMC hut in the Whites was built at Madison Spring in 1888. I revised, and replaced the citation of the inaccurate 10th Mt. Division page with a citation from the AMC's hut history timeline. 206.208.105.129 (talk) 18:06, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: First AMC Hut

message: I was interested to find this definition of a mountain hut by a leading British alpinist: "A mountain hut is a purpose-built refuge situated at some strategically high place in the mountains so that one or more peaks are readily accessible from it. It may vary from a simple bivouac shelter to something resembling a small hotel in size and facilities".Kev Reynolds, "Practicalities of staying in a mountain hut", Cicerone, 8 April 2018 . Should this article be expanded to include more primitive huts? See also Talk: Wilderness path. Rwood128 (talk) 14:52, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition and more primitive mountain huts