Talk:Brooks Range

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 February 2020 and 24 April 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kvicich.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism!
Numerous four letter words and lewd phrases have been scattered about throughout this article. 216.74.244.66 22:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)Don Granberry.


 * I reverted all of the vandalism. -- Spireguy 23:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

MAP!!!
Why isn't there a map showing where the range runs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.116.65.118 (talk) 03:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * While we can now easily add a map of Alaska showing the approximate centre of the range, this will be misleading as it will not show it overlapping into Canada, thus causing some confusion. What we really need is a specialized map of the range, showing it's entire length across Alaska and into the Yukon (Canada). RedWolf (talk) 19:58, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Need a better accounting of sub-ranges
While links exist, the Romanzof and Endicott need to be mentioned. And likely others. 143.232.210.38 (talk) 21:38, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Brooks Range. 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/20111005174426/http://globaltwitcher.auderis.se/artspec_information.asp?thingid=44751 to http://globaltwitcher.auderis.se/artspec_information.asp?thingid=44751

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:08, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

February 2021: No geology section--Why?
I find it very strange that the article doesn't go into the formation of the range, the forces at work on it, the composition of the range and all the other aspects which could be seen as "geological".--Quisqualis (talk) 03:16, 20 February 2021 (UTC)