Talk:Mount St. Helens/Archive 3

Red Zone and Blue Zone
Adding to my previous entry, the Red Zone and Blue Zone also played a major role in keeping the death toll to a minimum. The Red Zone and Blue Zones were roughly ten-and-20 mile boundaries around the volcano (with exception to the northwest side, in wich the Red and Blue Zone bordered only three miles away from the summit, and both restricted zones weren't full complete "circles" as some thought), and were signed into order on April 30 by Dixy Lee Ray. The Red Zone was a restricted area closed to all persons except those in the scientific community, while the Blue Zone was a limited-access restricted area, which allowed approved persons in only on a day-to-day basis, and only during daylight hours.

Interestingly, of the 57 killed, only three were in the Red Zone. The remainder were both either within, or totally outside the Blue Zone entirely.Srosenow 98 (talk) 10:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)


 * When the danger area was set up no-one envisaged such a large blast. The only similar blast had occurred at Shiveluch inthe Soviet Union in the 1950's and information was rather limited.The Geologist (talk) 12:00, 11 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Source: Up From the Ashes. 60 Minutes. VHS. (C) 1990 Fisher Broadcasting Inc., KOMO-
 * The "Source" note was part of Srosenow's preceding post, yes? (Otherwise, since the signature precedes it, it almost looks as though the note was added by the author of the following paragraph.)  Memetics (talk) 07:20, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The american goverment set a 25 mile radious and anyone who lived in that radious were evacuated from there homes to be protected from the eruption but one person who refused to leave was Harry Trumen who was 84 years old and had lived in his house for 50 years and that is why he would not leave —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.147.223 (talk • contribs) 11:04, 3 November 2008 (UTC)


 * What is a radious?? - I assume you mean RADIUS. Harry Truman refused to leave and is on record as saying that he didn't believe that MSH was dangerous. One of his sayings was "I know that mountain and that mountain knows me. That mountain will sure never hurt me." He died, like the others who died because they refused to accept what scientist were telling them, preferring to believe pseudo-scientists who claimed they knew better. The same pseudo-scientists told the good citizens of Montserrat that the volcano was harmless and it was safe to enter the danger area. Many people died when a pyroclastic surge overflowed the Tar Valley and engulfed them. When a volcanologist says a volcano is dangerous there is a good reason for saying so and you ignore the safety limits at your own risk.The Geologist (talk) 12:00, 11 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Huge123____I think you were disappointed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.47.122.220 (talk) 23:34, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Very little info on sulphur dioxide
There seems to be very little in the article about the amount of sulphur dioxide produced by Mount St. Helens. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.207.21 (talk) 09:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * That's probably because there was not a lot known about emissions of gases at that time. MSH taught us volcanologists a lot which we had not known before the explosion and it wasn't just gases that we knew little about.The Geologist (talk) 12:01, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request
In the "360-degree panorama," the picture is actually only a "180-degree panorama' as the entire mountain is visible as the photographer positioned along the southern rim. If this were a 360-degree panorama, half the photo would be filled with the rolling hills to the South and you'd see Oregon to the South, etc.

Mortonjhop (talk) 18:51, 27 March 2010 (UTC)


 * As far as I can tell, this is a true 360 degree image. The right hand end of the picture matches up with the left hand end (pretty much perfectly). Note that the lakes referred to at the right hand end of the image, lie south of the mountain. Mikenorton (talk) 19:16, 27 March 2010 (UTC)


 * It seems 360 to me too. But, if consensus shows otherwise, someone else can do the edit for you or you can request an edit again. --JokerXtreme (talk) 19:38, 27 March 2010 (UTC)


 * It appears to be a full (or very close to a full) 360 to me as well - at the very least it's clearly much more than the 180 claimed in the edit request. Any aparent inconsistency on each end can easilly be attributed to artifacts from the stitching of multiple images.
 * To get some clarification, I've requested that - who uploaded the image - to provide feedback/clarification on the image. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:55, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

also, can some one enter what was learned after the eruption?


 * The details of the photo says it is 360°, the photo poster says s/he often shoots 360° photos, and it has survived commons Featured Photo review with that description—no small feat. Besides it looks 360° to me too (Mount Hood at 80% from left edge; Mount Jefferson, 88% (with the Three Sisters just to its left); Mount Rainier, 50%; Mount Olympus, 25%; possibly Saddle Mountain, 15%; and all the lakes around the south side.  The split appears to be approximately WSW.  —EncMstr (talk) 20:28, 28 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, it really is a true 360. To help clarify this point I have created a map on google that identifies various notable landmarks in the image. http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&msa=0&msid=116803011662351216901.000482fdf07a6e4870a4d&ll=46.191358,-122.184277&spn=0.027034,0.075102&t=p&z=14 I hope this helps --Farwestern (talk) 06:41, 30 March 2010 (UTC)


 * "I hope this helps". May help to point out how close to the crater you were standing when you took the picture. I am guessing the crater would normally fill a person's vision from where you were standing, when looking at its center. It looks "normal" in the photo, which may be what is throwing off people's perception. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.102.189.120 (talk) 02:27, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

The image is not a 360°. The right side of the image does not match the left side - look at the snow patterns, also the crater opening would appear wider than it does. It is at most a 180° panorama looking northwards - the clue is the crater opening.The Geologist (talk) 12:22, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

correct pronunciation of Mt. St. Helena?
correct pronunciation of Mt. St. Helena? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.105.10.184 (talk) 17:29, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The correct pronunciation of Mount Saint Helens is MOUNT SAINT HELENS. Saint Helena is an ISLAND in the Atlantic Ocean which is where Napoleon was imprisoned. Mount Saint Helena is in California and the "Helena" is usually pronounced "He-lay-na." Well my wife says that is how her grandmother who was Russian BTW pronounced it.The Geologist (talk) 13:02, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

broken image link
The following link at the top of the "human history" section is broken:

Does anyone know how to fix it? Thanks.DavidRF (talk) 20:46, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It has been fixed. Dabbler (talk) 18:01, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Mount St Helens Summit Pano II.jpg to appear as POTD
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Mount St Helens Summit Pano II.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on April 10, 2013. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2013-04-10. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:27, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

360° panorama is a beautiful photo, but it's not a 360° panorama
Near the bottom of the article is a beautiful photo of the crater up close, whose caption begins with the description:

"360° panorama from the summit of Mount St. Helens as seen in October 2009".

But this photo cannot possibly be a 360° panorama, simply because its left side does not anywhere match up with its right side.

I suggest that whoever introduced the photo relabel it — but this time, correctly. (Such as: "Wide-angle panorama . . .".)Daqu (talk) 21:24, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

P.S. This is the very same photo that appears directly above this section on this talk page, as the photo that apparently was the picture of the day on April 10, 2013, taken by Gregg M. Erickson.

Daqu (talk) 21:40, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


 * See the discussion on this very point several sections above at Talk:Mount St. Helens. Mikenorton (talk) 22:20, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * As mentioned in the earlier discussion, the two sides do in fact match-up (the clouds shifted slightly during the exposure, but the landmarks all tie-out when you adjust for the camera apparently not having been held level - ie: the left side of the image is is pointed marginally lower than the far right side). This can be easilly seen by downloading the image, then pasting two copies of it side-by-side in whatever program you have available - even office products like Excel work for this. When doing this, the image appears to be just under 360° (there's a thin sliver missing, so maybe closer to a 359.5° image. Close enough.) --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:58, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The panorama can be viewed with . Barek is right -- it's 360, with a little vertical mismatch. —hike395 (talk) 10:36, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * To check this, I downloaded the image, sliced it in half vertically, and ran it through Photoshop to see if the edges would match; they do, albeit with a slight shift, but that is down to the photographer and environment, not a lack of angular coverage. drewmunn talk 11:07, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I know this is old, but I've just realised why the issue was brought up. Having seen it now on my iPad, the container in which it is stored cuts it down on smaller screens. drewmunn talk 14:39, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

NRHP listing
Mount St. Helens was listed on the National Register of Historic Places on September 11, 2013, under its Native American (Cowlitz) name, Lawetlat'la, as a Traditional Cultural Property. This has not yet been mentioned in the article. I don't have time to add it myself, especially since the addition needs to be done well so as not to degrade the quality of an article that has reached FA status. Here is a link to a feature page about it on the National Park Service's website, which also includes a link to the full NRHP nomination documentation. SJ Morg (talk) 11:26, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I have added a bit more information about this from the nomination. There is definitely more that could be written about the significance of the mountain to the local indigenous cultures, and it probably also deserves a sentence or two in the lead.  Magic ♪piano 17:14, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Revegetation of Mount St. Helens following the 1980 eruption
I was a bit surprised to find no encyclopedic summary of the revegetation process following the massive eruption 34 years ago.

Am I looking in the right place? Is there some other article in Wikipedia that covers this topic, based on all the research papers that have been written about plant and wildlife regrowth and repopulation of the damaged area and new topographical features?

I searched the Talk page and archives for "revegetation", "vegetation", "regrowth", etc. No luck. Surprising. N2e (talk) 01:11, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 December 2014
86.27.196.34 (talk) 18:36, 3 December 2014 (UTC) so so fake you poo yr 5 rule at john shelton primary school
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (e • t • c) 18:52, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 March 2016
i want to edit the facts about mount st helens

87.102.37.29 (talk) 17:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC)


 * You need to say what you want to change in the article. Mikenorton (talk) 17:47, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 May 2016 alter: catastrophic
2nd para reads: "Mount St. Helens is most notorious for its catastrophic eruption on May 18, 1980, at 8:32 a.m. PDT" however "catastrophic" is actually a technical term referring to the magnitude of the eruption under the volcanic explosivity index (VEI) and not just descriptive. 1980 St Helens was a VEI 5 eruption and so is paroxysmic.

131.217.40.224 (talk) 04:55, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Check sources (outside of WP) and it seems to be right. Thanks — Andy W.  ( talk  · ctb) 00:21, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Photo- Mt St Helens as seen from Portland OR
The one which describes it as Mt Fuji of the US. That's news to me. Someone has good eyes. Could it be Mt Hood?161.97.140.117 (talk) 16:21, 30 October 2015 (UTC)


 * The source of this picture (an engraving not a photo) looks reliable enough and the viewpoint seems OK when checked on Google Earth - the description says " Detail of engraving of Portland, Oregon and Mount Rainier and Mount St. Helens, Washington. (Click to enlarge). The Columbia River is middleground and the Willamette River is in the foreground. Created by E.S. Glover. Published 1879, San Francisco. "Bird's-eye-view", looking east to the Cascade Mountains. Original lithograph shows Mount Rainier, Mount St. Helens, Mount Adams, and Mount Hood, and also the Columbia River and the Willamette River". Mikenorton (talk) 16:53, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Using peakfinder ( www.peakfinder.org ) both Mt Hood and Mt St Helens are visible from Portland Oregon, and if the view point is adjusted to the line of hills to the SW, eg https://www.peakfinder.org/?lat=45.4977&lng=-122.6822&azi=75&zoom=5&ele=122 the view fits quite well, and the small peak to the left in the lithograph matches the shape of Goat Mountain in PFinder, with nothing of similar shape near Mt Hood. HTH. Mattymmoo (talk) 22:39, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2017
editer required Shadowcraft03 (talk) 03:13, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER   ★  04:19, 24 February 2017 (UTC) mount st helens eroupeded in 1980 and caused a humungus land slide

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mount St. Helens. 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/20140714172521/http://www.hiddenjourneys.co.uk/Audio%20Slideshows.aspx to http://www.hiddenjourneys.co.uk/Audio%20Slideshows.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:43, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mount St. Helens. 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/20140714165827/http://www.hiddenjourneys.co.uk/Vancouver-Los-Angeles/Cascade%20Mountains.aspx to http://www.hiddenjourneys.co.uk/Vancouver-Los-Angeles/Cascade%20Mountains.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:09, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Meaning change by Typo?
"A massive debris avalanche triggered by an earthquake measuring 5.1 on the Richter scale caused an eruption that reduced the elevation of the mountain's summit from..."

Is the word 'by' missing from that statement? (to wit..

"A massive debris avalanche triggered by an earthquake measuring 5.1 on the Richter scale caused *BY* an eruption that reduced the elevation of the mountain's summit from ..."

I'm suspicious of the idea that the debris avalanche, or the earthquake, caused the eruption - rather the other way around..

-Dan- (just passing through..) 2601:600:8700:9C4:E8C2:2190:5F8E:AF07 (talk) 17:26, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

The sequence is very well understood. The earthquake happened first causing the bulge to slump, the "massive avalanch", downslope. That released the explosive pressure.98.164.84.48 (talk) 20:22, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 November 2018
I want to win an argument, you can re-edit it when its done 170.177.228.137 (talk) 20:39, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: No. - FlightTime  ( open channel ) 20:49, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Bill Wurtz' song?
Nobody gonna talk about the song “Mount St. Helens is about to Blow Up” by Bill Wurtz? --Tito zz (talk) 16:50, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 November 2019
"an earthquake measuring 5.1 on the Richter scale caused an lateral eruption" should be "a lateral eruption" Itsbb8-m8 (talk) 08:32, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reporting this. I have changed the text in the article. GeoWriter (talk) 12:11, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

"Dante's Peak"
A few places online state that the volcano rim scenes with the actors and helicopter fly-overs were filmed at Mount St. Helens; yet there is no mention of that anywhere in the article.

Can someone research & verify that?

Then include it in the article?

Just curious. 2600:8800:784:8F00:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 20:43, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 January 2021
Smell yer maw Idkwhoiam12354 (talk) 14:51, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Not done: --Semptepro (talk) 15:26, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

FA in need of review
This is an old Featured Article on a very important topic that needs review, in my opinion, 15 years later. Issues spotted:


 * There are several unsourced sentences throughout the article;
 * Images need checking to meet MOS:SANDWICH (and a copyright check probably wouldn't hurt); ✅ — hike395 (talk)
 * No plants/vegetation/ecology? Nothing on potential hazards/future eruptions?
 * The version of this article that was accepted at the end of its last FAR had very few scholarly sources, so a new survey of the available sources would be welcome, for instance:
 * Mechanisms of Primary Succession: Insights Resulting from the Eruption of Mount St Helens;
 * Impact on Agriculture of the Mount St. Helens Eruptions ✅ — hike395 (talk)
 * Ecological Responses to the 1980 Eruption of Mount St. Helens
 * Seismicity associated with renewed dome building at Mount St. Helens, 2004–2005
 * Physical Events, Environments, and Geological—Ecological Interactions at Mount St. Helens: March 1980–2004

The article needs to be reviewed for comprehensiveness by someone knowledgeable. RetiredDuke (talk) 19:17, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Are all the links on External Links necessary?


 * Under review, see Featured article review/Mount St. Helens/archive2. — hike395 (talk) 17:07, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

A source from the USGS.
I found this source right here, maybe we could use it for some parts of this article, especially its future eruptions. (https://www.usgs.gov/volcanoes/mount-st-helens) — Preceding unsigned comment added by The great Jay (talk • contribs) 23:58, 24 May 2021 (UTC)