Talk:Sangemarmar Sar

Untitled
I just copyedited the existing intro paragraph (adding the two alternate names, both of which seem to more common in the climbing literature, I don't know about local usage). But the explicit description of the Batura Muztagh probably doesn't need to be there, since it is more relevant to that article and is much the same as found there. So I would recommend taking it out, but I'll leave it there for now. -- Spireguy 02:46, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Canadian expedition info
I just moved the following from the article to here:


 * This mountain was named in 1964 by the First Canadian Himalayan Expedition. Due to bad weather and government bureaucracy the team failed to make the summit, coming within 1000' of its peak. The team (consisting of Hans Gmoser, Gunti Prinz, Donald Lyon, Fred Roots,....) also named the nearby summit of Hachindar Chich although no attempt was made.

The given reference has no mention of Sangemarmar Sar, the names of the team members (besides Roots), or almost anything else mentioned in the above paragraph. So this information is still not backed up by a verifiable source. (I gather that some of the above was based on a personal communication...that's not verifiable, sorry.) Presumably the 1966 CAJ mentioned in the above reference would be a much better source. If I have time I can check the 1966 AAJ. -- Spireguy (talk) 20:14, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I put in some info from the AAJ article (1965, as it turns out), and I finally did delete the unnecessary info from the intro paragraph. I also added a little bit of geographic info. The 1966 CAJ may still have interesting additional info; I'll also look for more on the single ascent. -- Spireguy (talk) 22:03, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Altitude: 6949m, 6990m or 7050m?
>>

The article currently gives an altitude of 6949m for Sangemarmar Sar, while List of mountains in Pakistan gives 7050m. The Himalayan Index also gives 7050m, but E. Jurgalski at 8000.com is giving 6990m for Sangemarmar Sar (Sang-e-marmar).

I don't know what reference Jurgalski is using for his 6990m, but given his credibility and the fact that he is probably using more recent surveys/maps as the HI, I am tempted to change the altitude to 6990m (with a prominence of 850m instead of currently 1050m). Any other thought or objection?--Pseudois (talk) 16:32, 11 January 2012 (UTC)