Talk:List of mountains in Norway by height

	Norway portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway 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.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Mountains Mid‑importance

	Mountains portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Purpose of this article

In addition to providing readers some information about the topography of Norway, this is also intended as a resource for people who are interested in scaling these peaks. Ideally, the tables would also include a rating of the difficulty of climbing the peaks, but I haven't been able to find such an overview. --Leifern 18:04, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Names

I have drawn names from the list maintained at http://www.nfo2000m.no/. My guess these are drawn from the names in the M711 maps. There are a couple of recurring issues here:

Whether or not "tind" should always include the definitive term, i.e., "tinden," such as Glittertind or Glittertinden
Whether or not we should refer to a specific chain of peaks by their individual names, or by the series, e.g., Skagastølstindane or Skagastølstind/Skagastølstinden for each peak.

--Leifern 00:10, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whether to include the definite form or use the indefinite root, that is the question.

One approach is to check English language publications. Pulled my copy of Walking in Norway by Connie Roos, Cicerone Press, 1997. It appears to stick to the definte form and includes the following:

Galdhøpiggen
Glittertind (the only exception—not sure why)
Storsmeden
Sagtinden
Rondslottet
Storonden

So the convention used by Roos appears to be to stick to the common Norwegian usage. Several of the popular tourist guides appear to use the same approach. Sounds like a good approach to me.

I'd probably feel more comfortable with the Skagastølstindane (the Skagastølstind chain of peaks) which is redundant, but helps the Engish speaker understand the form...

Williamborg 02:35, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So, to summarize - for all single peaks (except for Glittertind) we use the definitive term. For all series of peaks where we find it used otherwise, we use the definitive plural form, e.g., Skagastølstindane. I'm okay with that, but it would mean changing things a bit precisely for Skagastølstindane, as some of the peaks have other names - we'd have to write "Skagastølstindane, Sentraltinden" as the entry in the list of peaks. --Leifern 14:54, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page Move

I recommend that this article be renamed to List of peaks in Norway over 2000 metres. This would make it fall more in line with the naming convention used in other pages listing mountains in countries (see Category:Lists of mountains). We should also be using "metre" and not meter as this page does not pertain to the USA. RedWolf 16:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objection to that. --Leifern 16:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

oppose. I live in Scandinavia. "Meter" is considered a normal English spelling here, because the word in Nordic languages is also meter. "Meter" isn't about pertaining to the US, and "metre" isn't about pertaining to the UK. The article is about a non-English speaking country. Our guidelines say in these cases, the first version used should remina. Variety across articles is a good thing in Wikipedia! --Cultural Freedom talk 2006-06-27 22:04 (UTC)

Oh, OK, but you'd be okay with List of peaks in Norway over 2000 meters, then, right? --Leifern 22:07, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely! No problem with that whatsoever. --Cultural Freedom talk 2006-06-28 07:39 (UTC)

Microformat

I'd like to add hCard microformat mark-up to the table on this article. It would involve adding class="fn org" to each cell in the "name" column; and adding class="adr" the "municipality" column , with the contents of each entry in that column in <span class="locality">...</span> but I can't see a way to make these edits using a simple find/replace edit.

The first entry would thus become:

|---- class="vcard"
|1
|class="fn org"|[[Galdhøpiggen]]
|2469
|2372
|class="adr"|<span class="locaity>[[Lom, Norway|Lom]]</span>
|1518 II "Galdhøpiggen"
|
|{{coord|61|38|10|N|8|18|44|E|type:mountain}}

Any suggestions? Perhaps a job for a bot? Andy Mabbett 11:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We can export it to a spreadsheet and then do text manipulation. It would have been easier if we hadn't subsegmented the list, but it should still work. I need to do something similar for List of Lighthouses in Norway, so I'll try it out. --Leifern (talk) 21:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HTML markup shouldn't be used in articles like that, it unnecessarily obfuscates the wikitext and makes it harder to edit. Also, {{coord}} now supports most of what the above monstrosity is trying to achieve. Compare:

|-
| 1
| [[Galdhøpiggen]]
| 2469
| 2372
| [[Lom, Norway|Lom]]
| 1518 II "Galdhøpiggen"
|
| {{coord|61|38|10|N|8|18|44|E|type:mountain|name=Galdhøpiggen}}

Most direct microformat use in articles has been converted to this more wiki style. --Para (talk) 22:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page move

I moved the page name to List of peaks in Norway by height. I am sorry if anyone would like me to discuss it here first, but I figured I'd be bold and just do it. There should be a article named this for every country (possibly omit 'by height' if there are no other variatons), and I don't really see the need of including the lower limit in the title, having it removed, Puttegga can be added to the list for example, which is notable for inclusion here. See Category:Lists of mountains by country. A separate list serving the needs of peakbaggers is also notable, being more a copy of the nfo2000-list. That would be easy to make, just find the version of this page in the history before peaks with less than 50 m prominence was removed, and copy it to a new page. --Berland (talk) 21:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, and we have to replace 'peaks' with 'mountains' in the title as well for consistency. --Berland (talk) 07:54, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beerenberg

Does this article only involve mountains on mainland Norway, if so it should be noted in the introduction. If not, Beerenberg should be included. 62.16.208.120 (talk) 10:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, Jan Mayen is part of the Kingdom of Norway. -- 193.69.63.30 (talk) 08:12, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Came to this article wondering if Beerenberg would be on it. I agree that even if it's not listed, it should be mentioned. --Ifrit (Talk) 11:56, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]