 | This  level-4 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Cliffs don't necessarily have to be vertical! I'll write something about cliff profile sometime. --Steinsky 18:26 21 Jul 2003 (BST (UTC+1))
I removed the mention of topographic prominence, which is not a measure of how high a cliff is; see that article for an explanation. I left the word denivelation in, even though it is little-used in English, as far as I know, except perhaps in caving. -- Spireguy 03:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I added a general caveat about cliff lists and demarcation in the opening section. I also put in some weasel words about the supposed world record holders---it is really hard to be sure about such "records", even leaving out the issue of how steep something has to be in order to be a cliff. Ideally, someone should redo this thoroughly with some sort of classification of cliffs into dead vertical, nearly so, and just plain steep. I don't know of an official classification of this sort---anyone else know one? -- Spireguy 03:57, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I did a quick add, mostly off the top of my head, of a bunch of cliffs around the world, since the list was pretty small and mostly European. I didn't put in details for a lot of the cliffs yet, but I wanted to get the ball rolling if anyone else had info. I'll probably return. -- Spireguy 03:59, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Rupal Face is one of, if not the largest, single mountain face on the planet, but it is not steep enough to be called a "cliff" or a "precipice." -- Spireguy 03:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nanga Parbat lies in Pakistan occupied Kashmir and the mention of Azad Kashmir or Pakistan is wrong. It is still in Indian territory and lies under the part of Kashmir which is under illegal occupation of Pakistan. U.N. also recognizes the original boundary as international boundary.
Is there a specific minimal measurement in height that determines if an area of vertical earth is considered a cliff? Since I wouldn't consider a two or three foot drop a cliff. Or is that just nonesence? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.68.137.43 (talk) 16:59, 20 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Does anyone else except me feel a bit unconfortable seeing one and the same picture twise on the same page?. Maybe one may consider leaving the big picture, at the begining, and adding to its caption the text from the smaller version in section Asia. Then this small picture can be removed.
GGenov 08:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd have thought that this would warrant a mention at least, and possibly even a full section of its own...--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 19:46, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Though guiness world records says they are (although I could no longer find any reference to the record on their website), I think this is probably anachronism carried over from before the days of satellite elevation modelling. Milford Sound in New Zealand has a choice of higher competitors, and I bet that it's not the only place. - Miasmic (talk) 23:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The word precipice redirects here, but this article doesn't even mention the word. Are "cliff" and "precipice" synonymous? If so, how? Are they exactly the same, almost the same, usually the same, vaguely similar, etc. Are the two words used interchangeably or does one connote a different image (at least to people who perceive a difference)? Is there regional variability in their usage? I'd appreciate any help here, and I think the article would benefit from some mention of this issue. Boneyard90 (talk) 16:59, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are very few references on the web for "Ortari" at all, let alone it being the highest sea cliff in Europe. Perhaps it's an argument from ignorance, but such a distinction would have attracted the attention of climbers, trekkers, geologists, etc especially since Greece isn't exactly the middle of nowhere. If one googles Hornelen, Cape Enniberg or Croaghaun for instance there are plenty of images, blogs, tribute websites, etc. Until somebody can provide any reference to back up this claim perhaps it's better to live it out. 86.41.71.94 (talk) 18:50, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Surely there must be a criteria to differentiate between a cliff and any other geological formation. I've been to Ireland and saw Cliffs of Moher to give just an example. A 200 m vertical (or near vertical) drop to the sea level is one thing, and a 200m drop through a series of peaks and valleys ending on a beach is quite another. To equate the two is an injustice to the former. There has to be something like minimum average slope, topographic prominence, etc. If everything is a cliff, nothing is a cliff! We might as well add Mount Everest to the list... Quoting from Britannica Online, a cliff is a "steep slope of earth materials, usually a rock face, that is nearly vertical and may be overhanging. Structural cliffs may form as the result of fault displacement or the resistance of a cap rock to uniform downcutting. Erosional cliffs form along shorelines or valley walls where the most extensive erosion takes place at the base of the slope. Because of their greater gradient, cliffs are subjected to greater erosive action and tend to retreat more rapidly than other slopes." 143.239.66.104 (talk) 13:08, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Cliff. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:13, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like 184.191.224.130 has introduced false information that has persisted in this article for over a year:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cliff&type=revision&diff=663263788&oldid=653889997
I'll be reverting those edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.255.218.202 (talk) 22:47, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Cliff. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:51, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see some major issues with this section:
The article had one of the worst cases of WP:OVERLINKING I've seen. I took a big shot at it, but I've left some that should probably be removed, and also probably just missed some. Please feel free to remove more! --Larry/Traveling_Man (talk) 17:00, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cliff. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:40, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is no true source that identifies this as being the case. In the sense of a terrain map analysis, or geological survey. This information should be removed.
Here is an original source of a terrain map analysis showing world's tallest cliffs (defined as 300% grade or more).: https://github.com/haraschax/cliff-finder Haraschax (talk) 21:23, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Bluff (Geography)" redirects here, and there is a link here from the Bluff disambiguation page. There is no word "bluff" on this page. DavidCh0 (talk) 12:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
