Talk:Mount Erebus

message: The Air New Zealand crash into Mount Erebus was an event of great significance in New Zealand. There is a fine small stain glass window and memorial plaque in St Matthew-in-the-City Church in Hobson Street Auckland.
----
I thought the lava lake had receded now? David.Monniaux 09:54, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: ----
In the first paragraph under "Geography", there is this sentence:
"Within the past year, small ash eruptions and even a small lava flow have also been observed coming from vents near the lava lake."
It needs to be changed because without a reference to the date it was written, it's impossible to know what "within the past year" means. Mrchaotica 01:07, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  total area covered 

message: Is there a zone where plants can grow due to the heat from the lava lake? 70.15.116.59 (talk) 04:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Life? 

message: Mount Erebus is in ANTARTICA AND IS ONE OF THREE VOLCANOES ON ROSS ISLAND.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.69.227.20 (talk) 20:35, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mount Erebus 

message: Has anyone else noticed that it says that Ross named Mount Erebus "Mount Terror"? If that is the case, then why isn't this one called Mount Terror instead of... Mount Terror?--24.24.142.225 (talk) 06:17, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mount Terror 

message: How is someone without a geology or volcanology degree supposed to understand this sentence:
::The composition of the current eruptive products of Erebus is anorthoclase-porphyric tephritic phonolite and phonolite
without having to go to three further articles?  I followed the link to phonolite but that article is, if anything, even more technical than this one!
Wikipedia science articles should be aimed the educated but non-specialist reader; instead they read like graduate school exams.  I realize people like to show off, but any article that requires half a dozen other articles to be understandable is a complete waste of time.
PainMan (talk) 07:33, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry that you feel you wasted your time. The beauty of the Wiki system is the links to follow and discover new stuff. If each technical term had to be defined each time used ... what a waste of resources. The links are there to follow. And yes, there is always room for improvement ... so jump right in! Placing a distracting tag at the top of the article because part of one section offends is rather insulting to your fellow editors - as is the show off comment above, please read WP:Agf. Vsmith (talk) 09:59, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Way Too Technical! 

message: I've added a cite tag to this claim in the lede. Has Erebus been under continuous observation since 1972?--Froglich (talk) 06:10, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Continuous eruption claim 

message: Shouldn't the ice towers/geysers be mentioned? They are a pretty remarkable feature. 71.75.136.51 (talk) 05:36, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just added a new section on them: Mount Erebus#Ice Fumaroles Robert Walker (talk) 19:22, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ice towers 

message: In the section on ice fumaroles, there seems to be a random sentence about martian ice caves. I'm not sure if it's relevant to the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.164.161 (talk) 08:17, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mount Erebus isn't on mars, is it? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mount Erebus. 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/20120312011946/http://erebus.nmt.edu/index.php/general-information to http://erebus.nmt.edu/index.php/general-information
*Added  tag to http://erebus.nmt.edu/
*Added  tag to http://erebus.nmt.edu/
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) 00:32, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: MEVO closed in 2016https://volcano.si.edu/volcano.cfm?vn=390020
, should update article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.79.208.160 (talk) 21:33, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  MEVO Closed in 2016 

message: I am slowly working on pages regarding the Terra Nova Expedition and was wondering if the following details should be included here
* the list of people from the Terra Nova who climbed Mount Erebus (Lead by geologist Raymond Priestley and included Tryggve Gran, a Norwegian ski specialist; Frederick Hooper, formerly a steward on the Terra Nova, Able Seaman Harry Dickason RN, Petty Officer George Abbott RN and geologist Frank Debenham)
* during their climb geologist Frank Debenham had the idea of a 'Polar Research Institute'
* Given that the Terra Nova team is mentioned in the historic sites, I think they could also be listed in the Climbing section.  With that I was thinking the Climbing section could do with being before the Historic Sites.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iain.r.d (talk • contribs) 10:08, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terra Nova Expedition 

message: The article states: "Mount Erebus ( /ˈɛrɪbəs/) is an active volcano, the second-highest in Antarctica (after Mount Sidley) and the southernmost active volcano on Earth." 
I take issue with the ambiguous wording. The sentence implies that, amongst active volcanoes on the continent of Antarctica, Mt. Sidley is first highest/tallest and Mt. Erebus is second highest/tallest. The "Mount Sidley" article states, however, that Mt. Sidley is a DORMANT volcano, that is, NOT ACTIVE. That is a contradiction. Should the sentence not read, "Mount Erebus is the second-highest volcano in Antarctica (after Mount Sidley)"? Personally, I don't know this fact to be true, but I know, as it stands, the "active volcano" qualifier makes it false. 
I will edit it for now and if someone is more knowledgeable on the subject, please correct/edit accordingly. Thank you. 66.91.36.8 (talk) 04:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguity in Height Ranking