Talk:Exposure (heights)

Section: Unclear definition
Is this section really needed? Guide books, from my experience, make it clear where a path (I'm a walker) is exposed and I believe climbing guides are pretty specific. The article in fact gives a decent definition -- though of course what constitutes exposure is subjective. Rwood128 (talk) 14:56, 2 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I agree it's not a great title - but that's what the German Wiki article used. I've moved it to after the lede, changed it to "Definitions" and added a few specific examples of differing definitions to show the variation. Over time we may be able to find better examples. --Bermicourt (talk) 21:03, 2 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I need to think about this. As walker I think of exposure in far simpler terms and therefore felt that this section was redundant. Maybe I'll add something to clarify the difference.
 * The use of sic reveals that you are apparently quoting. However there are no quotation marks -- also, it looks like you have the wrong citation for that example. Rwood128 (talk) 22:34, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I thought it was clear enough that the definitions are taken directly from the sources they are referenced to. But, if not, happy to add quotation marks.
 * I've corrected the link. Strange, the wording was correct, but the link wasn't! --Bermicourt (talk) 18:14, 3 June 2014 (UTC)