Contents

Talk:Mount Washington (Oregon)

Mount Washington (Oregon) has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: November 26, 2018. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Mountains Low‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Oregon Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. stateofOregon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical). Volcanoes Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Volcanoes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of volcanoes, volcanology, igneous petrology, and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VolcanoesWikipedia:WikiProject VolcanoesTemplate:WikiProject VolcanoesWikiProject Volcanoes articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

This does not look like a shield volcano! Are you sure it is one? --89.51.83.122 17:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. That's what a shield volcano looks like after over 100,000 years of glacial erosion has worn away the flanks almost completely, carving huge cirques on all sides and leaving only the hardened volcanic plug in the central conduit. --Seattle Skier (talk) 23:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Didn't expect an answer anymore! --89.51.93.189 11:39, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the paragraph that provided climbing insturctions. I don't think Wikipedia should should try to be this authoritative. A reader would be foolish to rely on this source of technical climbing information. I think it would be fine to include the difficulty of the easiest route in the infobox. --DRoll (talk) 20:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I know from experience that the GNIS usually underestimates elevation, so I went with the elevation of 7,795 feet (2,376 m) given by Wood & Kienle (1990) and Hildreth (2007). As another good resource, here is a Forest Service map that places the elevation only a foot lower. Jsayre64 (talk) 04:42, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]