Talk:Mount Logan

message: Alm93 changed the elevation to 6,081 metres but I have reverted because 5,959 is the official height of Mt. Logan as I know it from several sources. Alm93, if you have new information/source, please provide it. RedWolf 15:40, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
About the peak's prominence, something is clearly wrong. If Mentasta Pass is at an elevation of 747m (see link), then Mt. Logan's prominence should be 5212m, not 5250m. Either the elevation of Mentasta Pass is wrong or someone didn't subtract correctly....  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.186.108 (talk) 05:25, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elevation 

message: :Logan reportedly has the largest base circumference of any mountain on Earth.
What exactly is base circumference, and how is it defined? It would be good to have a link or some explanation because otherwise the statement looks very dubious. For example the first thought that came to my mind when reading the intro was: "Well, on what basis is its base circumference, whatever that is,  larger than say Mt Mckinley, Aconcagua, or Mt Everest?" Hope this is not too much of a pain for someone to sort out... Deuar 14:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The base of a mountain is not well-defined in general, so I am always extremely skeptical of such claims. Since Logan rises almost entirely from rather flat glaciers, the base of the massif is closer to being well-defined than for most peaks, and it does cover a huge amount of ground. But for most peaks, it's a very sketchy concept; hence comparisons are unlikely to be meaningful. -- Spireguy (talk) 02:06, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, it's not at all clear what this is supposed to mean.  One could take the base as the encircling contour at the level of the key col (as in the definition of prominence).  That is, at least, well-defined but obviously falsifies the claim, since it would mean that the base of Mont Blanc is almost all of Europe and the base of Mount Everest would be the whole of Afro-Eurasia.  So, to be honest, I think the claim ought to be deleted from the article.  Although it's well-sourced, it seems to be ill-defined and you'd imagine that, given several plausible definitions, you'd imagine that the Geological Survey of Canada would choose the one that puts the world's "most special" mountain in Canada. Dricherby (talk) 10:37, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  base circumference 

message: I found the map misleading. The graphic seems to imply the mountain is in Alaska and not the Yukon. Can we find a better one??  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.66.21.17 (talk) 13:47, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Map

message: I replaced all occurrences of the  with . The new template uses  internally so the appearance of the citation will always match that of the more often used and maintained template. Please feel free to ask any questions. Thanks --DRoll (talk) 04:03, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tl|bivouac}} 

message: Is there a pre-English name for the mountain? How is it known by local aboriginal peoples? — OwenBlacker (Talk) 19:12, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pre-English name 

message: Substituted at 00:31, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mount Logan. 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/20120921022054/http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/earth-sciences/hist/logan/6987 to http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/earth-sciences/hist/logan/6987
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) 19:01, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: We   currently say   reaches near freezing implying that the summit temperature is below freezing in all twelve months.  THis is wholly credible given the elevation, but do we have hard data?  In particular, how close to freezing is it really? Thanks, —Soap— 12:48, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does anybody have full climate data or is it just extrapolation?