Talk:List of rock formations

message: A lot of the places listed are just to articles about places with no mention of the rock formation.   Can we have more detail for each entry to describe why the formation is striking and what it is. 81.133.235.148 21:27, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

message: The somewhat poorly named List of famous rocks is a stub list and is quite redundant with the contents of this page. The famous part of that page name is troubling to some editors and a merge of that list here would solve that problem as well as remove a redundant list. Vsmith 01:44, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As one of the editors troubled by "famous", I have to agree with the merger proposal.  UnitedStatesian 02:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: This article should be named List of rock formations, as it is a list, per Wikipedia:Lists (stand-alone_lists). Mr. Absurd 17:12, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. --Gibmetal 77talk 17:48, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I too agree.  If I hear no objections in the next few days, I'll take care of the move if no one else does. UnitedStatesian 17:50, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Renaming

message: Can we eliminate the forever-growing list of rock formations in each country? There are of course tens of thousands of such features. Could we limit it to those that are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia entry - as is done in many such situations?  Cheers  Geologyguy (talk) 14:20, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The list 

message: Makes sense, considering the shortness of the "in Oceania" page. Silly to fork it off. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 08:42, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from List of rock formations in Oceania 

message: Assuming the "list of rock formations by country" articles are useful (quite a few countries have them), why not split List of rock formations in Oceania into List of rock formations in Australia and List of rock formations in New Zealand (there are only two other entries, which would thus be in the main List of rock formations only). I suppose the Lists for countries may include more descriptive text than the world list, and possibly some extra entries. I think that while the national lists should not list every rock formation, they could include some which are notable but not notable enough to have their own article Hugo999 (talk) 11:44, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split List of rock formations in Oceania 

message: Apparently Wikipedia has not managed to enlighten me of the various types of rock formations (Rock formation redirects here), but rather focuses on listing some countries' rock formations. Is this an encyclopedia, or a bloody tourist boucher? - 60.51.125.125 (talk) 03:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor impression 

message: gold  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.114.172.167 (talk) 15:26, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  gold 

message: I see a picture of an arch, are rock formations different than say a Hoodoo or an Arch?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.3.57.82 (talk) 13:44, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  what about? 

message: The best name for the article is rock formation. And would include the differences with rocky outcrop.--Lagoset (talk) 12:58, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rock formation