Talk:Dufourspitze

Which country?
This article says the peak is near the border of Switzerland and Italy, "on the Italian side". But it also says that it "is considered the highest mountain of Switzerland". And the article on Monte Rosa says: "The Dufourspitze is the highest peak of the Monte Rosa massif and at 4,634m is also the highest peak in Switzerland." --Delirium 17:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

It would seem obvious that even though the very peak is located in Italy, the border between Switzerland and Italy has a higher elevation than any other mountain(top or not) in Switzerland. The use of the word 'peak' could be misleading, I guess. --84.208.224.234 (talk) 14:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Name
Why on earth is this page called dufourwhaterver and not Monte Rosa, it is always known as monte rosa and the separate summits are only mentioned when climbing them. The page should be moved to Monte Rosa.  Greatestrowerever  Talk Page ''' 03:16, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The name Monte Rosa is used for the summit only on small scale maps, on larger scales the name Dufourspitze always appears (at least on the swiss maps ), but effectively the first name is more current (919,000 for "Monte Rosa" and 67,400 for Dufourspitze on google) so it would not be illegitimate to move the page. Zacharie Grossen (talk) 17:10, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think a move probably would be in order: certainly Monte Rosa was what I knew it as before discovering Wikipedia. —Ian Spackman (talk) 20:18, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * As everyone seem to agree, I placed the move template on Monte Rosa. Zacharie Grossen (talk) 18:41, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if the interpretation of the google result is pertinent, "Monte Rosa" being also the name of the range. If we only had one article for both, I think it's conceivable that it could be at "Monte Rosa", but as there is also "Monte Rosa Massif", the article about the peak should be at Dufourspitze or Pointe Dufour (Dufour Peak). -- User:Docu


 * In the absence of additional feedback, I'd move it back. -- User:Docu


 * It may be not a good idea to move "Monte Rosa Massif" to "Monte Rosa" since "Monte Rosa" is much more used than "Dufourspitze" outside Switzerland and (i think) "Monte Rosa", as the second summit of the Alps, has a higher importance than the whole range. Zacharie Grossen (talk) 17:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * How did you asses this? Looking at Google Scholar, it seems that publications about "Monte Rosa" are about the massif rather than its main summit. -- User:Docu


 * Hello again! see the respective assessments on wikiprojects. it is anyway ok for me to keep the actual name... Zacharie Grossen (talk) 19:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Dunantspitze
The Dunantspitze is just a point on the Dufourspitze, like the Sattel and the Grenzgipfel. Describing it as one of the main summits of Monte Rosa, amongst Nordend, Zumsteinspitze, Signalkuppe, is misleading. ZachG (Talk) 18:32, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


 * WRONG. These are two different peaks, though very closely situated. Dufourspitze is indeed the highest peak in Switzerland (4634m), while the recently (October 2014) named peak Dunantspitze is slithglty lower (4632m). see here -- ZH8000 (talk) 18:51, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You don't understand. Dunantspitze is a "rock" on the Dufourspitze, not a real summit. Nobody goes there just to climb it, like other summits of Monte Rosa. You cannot add every information about Monte Rosa in the first sentences. Please take some time to read the article... ZachG (Talk) 12:56, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You obviously have no or too bad geographical education. See below. -- ZH8000 (talk) 14:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Monte Rosa vs Dufourspitze vs Monte Rosa Massif (an example of a 7 years old error on WP)
Pre-remarks:
 * The terms Monte Rosa and Monte Rosa Massif are synonyms, the same way as mountain and mountain massif can be synonyms. There are numerous examples (e.g. Rigi).
 * Therefore, the term Monte Rosa Massif is a pleonasmn. Monte Rosa is a mountain massif.
 * Monte Rosa and Dufourspitze are NOT a synonyms, obviously.
 * There is already a another Monte Rosa Massif article. And correctly related to the German (local language! They should know it, shouldn't they!) article of the (almost) same title Monte Rosa, except for the massif ... it can be left off, since it is a pleonasm. – The English WP article Monte Rosa Massif correctly should/must be called Monte Rosa only.
 * There is no peak/summit called Monte Rosa and has never been. At least not by serious sources, such as swisstopo maps, geographical articles etc.. Perhaps you can find this amateurish error and oversimplification in touristic brochures and wrongly translated aticles (by obvious amateurs, BUT a repeated error does not make it less incorrect (sic!)).
 * This article must be named Dufourspitze, because it is (or should be) about the peak/summit, not the whole mountain (aka mountain massif). Or then consequently merged with the Monte Rosa Massif article and become called Monte Rosa (about the mountain massif with its highest peak Dufourspitze). EITHER, OR.

Arguments:
 * The "mount" Monte Rosa has always been a mountain massif . Its peaks has never been called by the same name. Its highest peak is called Dufourspitze since 1863. Before, it was called Höchste Spitze , or Westspitze. Easily checkable by historic maps by swisstopo.
 * swisstopo is the Swiss Federal Office of Topography by the Swiss Gorvernment. Their maps are based on geographical information by geo.admin.ch. Their work is based on the GoelG, the GeoInformation Act:
 * The purpose of this Act is to ensure that geodata relating to the territory of the Swiss Confederation is made available to the Federal, Cantonal and municipal authorities, to industry and commerce, to academic and scientific institutions and to society at large, for the broadest possible use, in a sustainable, up-to-date, rapid and easy way, with the required quality and at reasonable cost. (GeoIG Art. 1)
 * In other words: swisstopo is the official coordinating and defining authority about–besides others–geographical names of geographical objects in Switzerland (GeoIV Art. 17 Ziffer 2).


 * Hint: Therefore, the Dufourspitze is called SPITZE ... German for peak ... because it is a peak!!! AND, the Monte Rosa is called MONTE ... Italian for mountain (massif) ... because it is a mountain (massif)!!!

Strong indicators:
 * This article has (since "ever"?) been correctly related/connected to the German WP article of Dufourspitze. As probably every other wikipedias in another language than English (at least true for German, Italian, French, Spanish, Afrikaans, Romansh, Portuguese, Nederlands, Turkish, Greek, ... just to name a few!!
 * Read the German WP articles: "'Der Berggipfel gehört zum Monte-Rosa-Massiv auf der Grenze zu Italien'". On the German wikipedia, they obviously (and understandably) do not make this stupid and amateurish error.

Help for dummies:
 * It is the same relation between the (mount) Rigi, refering to the entire mountain (massif) situated between the Lake Lucerne and Lake Zug and Schwyz, AND its peak/summit, which is correctly called "Rigi Kulm". These are TWO DIFFRENT THINGS ... though obviously related.

Besides:
 * About a forth of the whole Monte Rosa (massif) is situated in Italy. Easily dedectable on a swisstopo map.

Source:
 * Swisstopo maps of every age.
 * Countless, serious, first hand articles (of geographical nature).

-- ZH8000 (talk) 18:37, 28 February 2016 (UTC)


 * ZH8000, please make yourself more familiar with some of the wikipedia guidelines in particular WP:RECOGNIZABLE and WP:SOURCES. I think the article is clear in the sense that Dufourspitze and Monte Rosa are not synonym (if you take the time to read it properly). You seem to actually like swisstopo, which is truely a great source, but not always helpful to decide what the best name is (Lyskamm for instance). You need to rely on literature for that, not excusively on maps. ZachG (Talk) 12:49, 29

February 2016 (UTC)
 * I can understand that it is hard to admit that you followed a fundamental error. And that it was even you who introduced it. Nevertheless, an encyclopaedia's ultimate goal is to collect 'error-free' knowledge, even then when a selected "majority" denies it. My preference for swisstopo is not a personal priority, but since it is the single authority about geographical names in Switzerland. And I already made very clear how erroneous your attitude/statements is/are. --ZH8000 (talk) 13:04, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Swisstopo is not the single authority (the maps are not even in English). You really need to read more about wiki guidelines... I think this article has already many sources, but you can add for anything unsourced, that would be helpful. ZachG (Talk) 13:11, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well swisstopo, or the Swiss Federal Office for Topography is indeed THE authority, even defined by law (GeoIG, see above)!!
 * Obviously I know WP rules quite well (otherwise I would eventually argue not the way I do).
 * And please, feel free to make clear to the interested and educated WP reader that there are many–perhaps too many–English sources reproducing the same error! – Or, perhaps, you, yourself only, even read them the wrong way? Imagine this!? -- ZH8000 (talk) 14:28, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You really need to read the wikipedia guidelines (and I asked you to add ) that would be really helpful). And no, there is no single authority for anything, that would be against WP:Neutral point of view. ZachG (Talk) 14:40, 29 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Nonsense. I do not argue against single statements, but about the whole "concept" to call this article "Monte Rosa" instead of Dufourspitze (based on your misconception of Monte Rosa) like it is done in virtually every other article in porbably almost other languages on WP. What exactely do you not understand in my first collective statement??? -- ZH8000 (talk) 15:01, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * And again as I said already above: "please, feel free to make clear to the interested and educated WP reader that there are many–perhaps too many–English sources reproducing the same error!" -- ZH8000 (talk) 15:03, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ZH8000, Monte Rosa is the subject of this article, not just Dufourspitze, otherwise it couldn't be an interesting article. ZachG (Talk) 15:20, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

THAT's IT! Your misconception. -- ZH8000 (talk) 15:51, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 29 February 2016

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved. Number   5  7  12:41, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Monte Rosa → Dufourspitze – Because this article should be about the Dufourspitze, the highest peak of Monte Rosa. Since this English WP article is connected to other language articles with titles, such as Dufourspitze, Pointe Dufour, Punta Dufour (an so forth) and not its mountain (massif) Monte Rosa. There is a corresponding request to move the English WP article Monte Rosa Massif to Monte Rosa after this move. And finally, most text in this article (about the Monte Rosa massif) must then be subsequently moved to the then new Monte Rosa article (currently called Monte Rosa Massif). Only specific aspects about Dufourspitze should stay in the newly called article Dufourspitze. The result would finally re-establish a long needed coherent correspondance with any other language on WP! – See also the extensive argumentation: Talk:Monte Rosa. – An alternative would be to merge both articles Monte Rosa and Monte Rosa Massif to Monte Rosa. ZH8000 (talk) 16:07, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. I agree this is a mess, and I commend your volunteering to sort it out. No such user (talk) 12:15, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * NOTE this is an improperly formatted multimove request, see Talk:Monte Rosa Massif for the associated move request -- 70.51.46.39 (talk) 04:56, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Strong Support. It is possible that this confusion derives from the low quality of the used sources in English language. Alex2006 (talk) 18:59, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Makes eminent sense. --Bermicourt (talk) 19:31, 7 March 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Dufourspitze. 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/20081218101046/http://www2.ogs.trieste.it/gngts/gngts/convegniprecedenti/2002/media/2001/contents/pdf/02_02_full.pdf to http://www2.ogs.trieste.it/gngts/gngts/convegniprecedenti/2002/media/2001/contents/pdf/02_02_full.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714013204/http://www.macugnaga-monterosa.com/italiano/monterosa/pagine/storia_dell_alpinismo.htm to http://www.macugnaga-monterosa.com/italiano/monterosa/pagine/storia_dell_alpinismo.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090226232844/http://www.monterosa4000.it:80/walter-berardi.htm to http://www.monterosa4000.it/walter-berardi.htm

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) 13:09, 17 December 2016 (UTC)