Talk:Sistema Ox Bel Ha

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: page moved as WP:RM process was uncontested. Deacon of Pndapetzim ( Talk ) 15:02, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Ox Bel Ha Cave System → Sistema Ox Bel Ha — Sistema Ox Bel Ha is the official name used by both the National Speleological Society and the Quintana Roo Speleological Survey; see also Sistema Sac Actun, Sistema Dos Ojos, Sistema Nohoch Nah Chich. Alfie ↑↓ © 18:54, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.


 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:
 * I didn't simply move it myself, because right now  Sistema Ox Bel Ha  redirects to  Ox Bel Ha Cave System  – I wasn't sure whether doing so would have resulted in circular links. Alfie  ↑↓ © 18:54, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Surveyed length?
Sistema_Ox_Bel_Ha gives the surveyed length with 435.805 km as of January 2023. IMHO, the sole valid source is maintained by the Quintana Roo Speleological Survey, giving with Nov. 2022 only 346.798 km. According to historical data of the QRSS the largest increase in surveyed length happened with 44.5 km between May 1998 and April 1999. Failed the CINDAQ to officially report results of its new survey or was it not considered trustworthy by the QRSS? A difference of 89 km would be massive and without precedent in the exploration history of Ox Bel Ha. On the other hand, at least two authors of the CINDAQ’s report (Fred Devos, Christophe Le Maillot) are highly reputed in the cave diving community. In short: Which number is correct / should we give in the article? Alfie ↑↓ © 22:03, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Both? (with explanation) &middot; &middot; &middot; Peter Southwood (talk): 10:07, 11 January 2024 (UTC)