Talk:Teide/Archive 1

Eruption
if this erupts willl it effect every one in the world or will it only effect tenerife The Sunday Times reported in January that there would definitely be an eruption of Teide by the end of 2005.

Has there been any activity recently to confirm this prediction?


 * Don't believe what you read in newspapers!! - MPF 14:03, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * January 2006 now, and no, it didn't erupt in 2005 . . . MPF 01:44, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Ah the media got it so right again didn't they - can some one remind me of the date? Ah Yes it is 14th March 2008 and the eruption was where, when??? The Geologist (talk) 12:29, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and it won't for a long time. Yes, "El Teíde" is only dormant, but the peak itself has not errupted for thousands of years. The last acticity in the "Caňadas" was in 1909, but that was only a small peak "downhill" (as is said in the text already). Tje last eruption of a volcano on Tenerife which claimed lives was in 1706. A small peak on the northern ridge erupted and burried the merchants village of Garachico, which has never recovered its importance in the intercontinental trades.

The above contains a lot of errors: Teide is dormant - not extinct as some tour operators and property developers claim. El Chinyero erupted about 1 km2 of lava in 1909. The eruption of 1706 is not recorded as claiming any lives - people had ample time to avoid the flows. It destroyed several towns and villages, including Garachico which was the Principle or MAIN port of Tenerife. Due to the damage inflicted the port declined and the trade transferred to Santa Cruz de Tenerife which is now the principle deep water port of Tenerife. The Geologist (talk) 12:29, 14 March 2008 (UTC)


 * There was a spate of seismic activity from April 2004 to early 2005 caused by injection of magma below Teide's NW flank. Many expected it to erupt, but obviously it didn't.  There is, however, a significant body of molten magma below the volcano. OrbitalPete 12:49, 25 January 2007 (GMT).

What evidence do you have that magma was injected? Certainly the seismic crisis would seem to indicate that magma rose, but to be dogmatic as you are being, that magma was injected without supporting evidence is mischief making. The Geologist (talk) 12:29, 14 March 2008 (UTC)


 * At the upper cable station on Teide, about 200 m from the summit, there are information boards pointing out lava flows from the 14th Century. See also http://www.islandvulnerability.org/canarias.html which lists more recent eruptions. Booshank 02:20, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Volcanoes DO NOT erupt to timetables. I have been asked by people who one assumes are intelligent, what time, what day etc., will Teide erupt! Statistically an eruption is overdue, geologically and volcanologically it will happen where it happens when it happens and there is nothing you, or I and my colleagues can do to stop it. (I am a Geologist / Volcanologist) who was born and lives on Tenerife) The Geologist (talk) 12:29, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Personally I think that Teide is going to erupt in the next 100-200 years and that people should not take lightly the power the mountain contains. If there are any disturbing signs a.k.a a rock bulge like what was seen at Mount St Helens then no tourists should be allowed near the volcano. I also think that a couple of hundered years of being dormant could lead to a VEI 5 or 6 Eruption.

Personally I would be surprised if an eruption did not happen within the next 100 to 200 years. Which is a very wide margin of error. Historical eruptions on Tenerife have occurred in 1492, 1704, 1705, 1706 (which would suggest that there would be an eruption in 1707, but the next eruption occurred in) 1798. This was followed by 109 years of dormancy or quiescence. However since 2003 there has been an ongoing seismic crisis involving low magnitude seismic activity which may be indicative of magma rising, but and this is the big question: Will it lead to an eruption and if so where and when? The Geologist (talk) 12:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Teide is the subject of a song by Mike Oldfield on his 1982 album Five Miles Out. Which is a load of basura! The Geologist (talk) 12:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I have heard that this mountain casts the longest shadow in the world. Worthy of adding to the article? Gemfyre 03:53, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

No it doesn't cast the longest shadow in the world. Some would claim with justification that Mount Everest does. Certainly Kilimanjaro in Africa, casts a longer dawn and dusk shadow as proved by photographs taken from the ISS. The Geologist (talk) 12:29, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

"Pico Del Teide (The Peak of Tenerife) is the modern French name attributed to the volcano"
French name??? I don't know if "Teide" is a name of French origin (wich I doubt), but obviously "Pico del Teide" is the SPANISH name of the vulcano... Canary Islands belong to Spain, not to France! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.33.205.19 (talk) 01:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing that out, of course it is Spanish, the change to French was an old bit of vandalism that had gone unnoticed. It was originally Spanish but changed by 82.112.135.41 on 22 November 2007.Fossiliferous (talk) 10:36, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Pico del Teide is a Spanish word derived from the Guanche language. The Gunaches believed that El Teide held the sky up! Hence Pico del Teide means the "Peak that holds the sky up!" As for the French - well there is an expression in English "Dream on," in other words el islas Canaria es España si, que Francois non and never will be. The Geologist (talk) 12:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Restructuring/Copy-editing
This article seems to be mostly inactive at the moment, so I've decided to Be Bold and restructure this article (slightly) before posting here.

This will be the first of a number of small edits I'm planning over the next few weeks, which i'm trying to split up, and do section by section, so everyone can see very clearly what I've done and change what they don't like.

So, first off, I've moved some of the sections around, so the article is more coherent, and changed a few of the section names. I HAVE NOT DELETED any information, I've simply reworded the original text so it reads and looks a little better.

I'll go through the other sections in a similar manner if noone has any objections to the way I'm doing this. After that I'll add any new content I can think of. As a geologist I might need help on the flora/fauna, tourism, and anything else not directly related to rocks, so contributions/suggestions would be very welcome!

Cheers, Fossiliferous 15:38, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay, finally stuck in the first of new geology sections. The formation of the volcano. This is still a bit rough, and needs some work. Since it mostly talks about the development of the island itself it might even seem a bit irrelevant, but it's the only way to explain how Teide formed and I think it is very important to note that this 'decade' volcano is only a pimple on the nose of the greater Tenerife volcanoes.

Fossiliferous 22:37, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

If I can help contact me - my details are where you and I are registered. I also think that we need to consider how to permanently protect pages like this from the idiots who seem to delight in vadalising them. The Geologist (talk) 13:31, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Notice deletion
Would whoever keeps deleting the notice about collecting fauna, flora geological specimens please note: It is CLEARLY stated in the information issued by the authorities, on notice boards etc., that it is illegal to collect fauna, flora or geological specimens without a permit. It is enforced by the National Park Police. People have been fined large amounts - hundred of euros per kilogram or part of., In 2002 6 German tourists were caught taking plants and rocks. They argued that since the information boards were in Spanish they could not understand them and were therefore excused! The courts didn't agree. 15 kg of rocks, several plants were confiscated, they were each fined 6,000 euros, spent 4 days in prison and were taken under armed escort and in handcuffs to the next available flight back to Germany. The aircraft had in effect departed the stand and in front of the tourists at Reina Sofia Airport, the aircraft door was opened, steps placed and then one by one the people were escorted still handcuffed on to the aircraft and to their seat. Then their handcuffs were removed. At that point they were then handed back their passport and it was clearly and legibly stamped in German and Spanish "Not permitted to enter the kingdom of Spain or Canary Islands - Persona no grata." Remove the information again and I'll have the page locked. The Geologist (talk) 18:31, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Misinformation on Teide
has anyone been to the peak of teide and read the rediculous board which explains the topography of teide as being formed by a tsunami? As a geography student I knew immediately it didn't make sense but loads of tourists just read and believe. Something should be added to explain that this is not true. MGtheHB (talk) 22:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

"Teide (pronounced "Tay-dee")"
That's totally wrong. "Tay-dee" would be correct if the name was "Teidi". The "de" on "Teide" sounds like the "de" in "de Niro", for instance. Please someone correct this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.33.205.19 (talk) 01:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah señor so you know better than us Tenerifians! The word Teide rhymes with el Ingleesh word LADY so it is pronounced "TAY-DAY". Comprende. Also the name of the volcan is Pico del Teide and Teide is a Spanish word of possible Guanche origin. The Guanches considered that Teide held the sky up! So to interpret the name it means the "Peak that holds the sky up!" The other name used is El Teide which means "The Skyholder!" May I also suggest that you go and undertake a course in Linguistics and Spanish.

I happen to live and work as a geologist and volcanologist on Tenerife. I am Spanish and went to school in England plus university in Madrid. So as I live and work on the island where I was born I consider that I do know what I am talking about! The Geologist (talk) 12:50, 14 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Use phonetic symbols, not some anglo-american "pronounced 'tay-dee'". Someone seems to have deleted the pronunciation guidance anyway? 83.59.28.188 (talk) 10:08, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Bad Grammar
On the subject of bad grammar, perhaps someone could at least try to tidy up the mess in paragraph 2 of the introduction. The English is truly appalling. Perhaps this paragraph should just be deleted because, as it stands, it is absolute nonsense. In fact, there are numerous grammatical errors throughout the entire article which need rectified.--62.249.233.80 (talk) 15:07, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Then you fix it ...


 * I have done so, hopefully it makes more sense now.--62.249.233.80 (talk) 14:49, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

references to legends
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guayota —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.46.241.210 (talk) 22:26, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I am sorry, but the English grammar in this section is appalling. Can someone tidy it up - otherwise I propose deleting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.249.233.80 (talk) 15:32, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I have attempted to fix this and several other glaring grammatical errors in the article. Hopefully it's better than it was.--62.249.233.80 (talk) 14:51, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Co-ordinates
The coordinates of Teide seem to point near the end point of the teleferico cable car. It is hundreds of meters from the peak. If we trust of gmaps or bing, the co-ordinates should be slightly adjusted. Though the exact point is always a bit fuzzy. 83.59.28.188 (talk) 10:12, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

According to various sources and verified with a DGPS (May 2010) - Dual Frequency Geographical Positioning System receivers the summit co-ordinates for Teide are 28 degrees, 16 minutes, 15.4 seconds North, 16 degrees, 38 minutes 21.5 seconds West. The altitude is 3717.971 m above the datum.The Geologist (talk) 16:26, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

13th most dangerous volcano in the world
The Five pillars of Wikipedia WP:PILLARS states "All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy: unreferenced material may be removed, so please provide references." Every Wikipedia edit page states "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable".

So, why have my attempts to obtain a verifiable reference for the statement in this article "It is considered to be the 13th most dangerous volcano in the world due to its proximity to several major towns.", by adding a "citation needed" tag to the statement, been removed on more than one occasion over the past 13 months (by User:The Geologist and User:Plantsurfer) and not replaced by a suitable verifiable reference?

I am disappointed that my repeated attempts to improve the Teide article in accordance with the Pillars should be eliminated while the unverifiable claim continues intact. I am aware that the sentence about Teide's rank was added by User:The Geologist, who might be a geologist working on Teide, but that does not excuse the absence of a verifiable reference. I am keen to resolve this because I want the text of this good article to be robust as possible. Removal of my attempt to improve the article does not benefit anyone except those unable or unwilling to provide evidence. I don't dispute the factual content but the problem with the statement is that it could, in certain circumstances, be misconstrued as a groundless claim and be removed as vandalism. What is stopping some mischievious user from changing 13 to a different ranking? Without the verifiable reference we would not be able to detect vandalism. A verifiable reference would eliminate that possibility. I suggest that a reference should be provided as soon as possible. GeoWriter (talk) 18:46, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * On 13 March 2009 21:41, User:Plantsurfer added a reference to this article for the claim that Teide is the 13th most destructive volcano.

The reference is http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Volcanoes/DecadeVolcanoes/

That USGS web page lists 16 Decade volcanoes in the following order:


 * 1. Avachinsky-Koryaksky, Kamchatka
 * 2. Colima Volcano, Mexico
 * 3. Mount Etna, Italy
 * 4. Galeras Volcano, Colombia
 * 5. Mauna Loa, Hawaii
 * 6. Merapi Volcano, Indonesia
 * 7. Niragongo Volcano, Democratic Republic of the Congo
 * 8. Mount Rainier, Washington
 * 9. Sakurajima Volcano, Japan
 * 10. Santa Maria/Santiaguito Volcano, Guatemala
 * 11. Santorini Volcano, Greece
 * 12. Taal Volcano, Philippines
 * 13. Teide Volcano, Canary Islands, Spain
 * 14. Ulawun Volcano, Papua New Guinea
 * 15. Unzen Volcano, Japan
 * 16. Vesuvius Volcano, Italy

Teide is number 13 in this list.

However, the web page does not mention destructivenes. In addition, the list on the web page is in alphabetical order!

Mauna Loa is not more destructive than, for example, Vesuvius.

Some supporting evidence is: Mauna Loa's activity style is overwhelmingly Hawaiian, the least destructive activity style (see Hawaiian eruption). Vesuvius has had numerous Plinian eruptions, which are much more destructive (see Plinian eruption). Maximum casualties for Mauna Loa would be the population of the big island of Hawaii, approx 150,000 (see Hawaii (island)). Maximum casualties for Vesuvius would be the Bay of Naples area (population approximately 20 times larger than Hawaii, see Naples). I have removed the claim that Teide is the 13th most destuctive volcano because of lack of supporting evidence.

GeoWriter (talk) 15:46, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, but the reference itself is useful, so why remove that? Plantsurfer (talk) 16:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I've added the reference GeoWriter (talk) 17:31, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

The USGS copied the information from the IAVCEI and United Nations Disaster Mitigation Committee Report. That list showed the volcanoes in order of perceived danger to surrounding communities and Teide, due to its location above Icod and close proximity to Puerto de la Cruz etc, considered to be the 13th most dangerous volcano on Earth.

The reason why Mauna Loa is considered to be more dangerous than Vesuvius is partly due to the fact that the higher up the list the more recent the last eruption - Mauna Loa 1984 but Vesuvius last erupted in 1944. Other factors are also taken into consideration including the type of the last eruption. I agree though the list as published here is misleading.The Geologist (talk) 16:33, 8 August 2010 (UTC)


 * The Geologist, thanks for your reply. The fact that an alphabetical listing of the 16 decade volcanoes also happens to exactly match their apparent danger ranking is very weird. Far too much of a coincidence for me. Can you provide any web links or bibliographic reference to that IAVCEI and United Nations Disaster Mitigation Committee Report? Thanks, --GeoWriter (talk) 00:02, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The Geologist, Does the "danger" order of the IAVCEI and UN list exactly match the alphabetical order of the USGS list, after all? Or is it just a coincidence that Teide is 13 on both lists, but other positions on the two lists are occupied by volcanoes in a different order? If you can't give a web link to the IAVCEI UN list, perhaps you could provide the "danger" list here in the order that it appears in the IAVCEI UN report? Thanks, --GeoWriter (talk) 00:31, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I found a list of the 18 most dangerous volcanoes in USA as classified by the USGS in December 2005 at :


 * 1. Kìlauea, Hawaii
 * 2. Mount St. Helens, Washington State
 * 3. Mount Rainier, Washington State
 * 4. Mount Hood, Oregon
 * 5. Mount Shasta, California
 * 6. South Sister, Oregon
 * 7. Lassen Volcanic Center, California
 * 8. Mauna Loa, Hawaii
 * 9. Redoubt Volcano, Alaska
 * 10. Crater Lake area, Oregon
 * 11. Mount Baker, Washington State
 * 12. Glacier Peak, Washington State
 * 13. Makushin Volcano, Alaska
 * 14. Akutan Island, Alaska
 * 15. Mount Spurr, Alaska
 * 16. Long Valley caldera, California
 * 17. Newberry Crater, Oregon
 * 18. Augustine Island, Alaska

This American "danger" list does not match up with the two American volcanoes in the Decade volcano list, if that is indeed to be taken as a list of the most dangerous volcanoes on Earth. --GeoWriter (talk) 20:37, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Teide, Vesuvius and Etna
A recent study showed that in the future there will be violent eruptions at Teide also revealed that it has a structure similar to that of Vesuvius and Etna. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.87.80.36 (talk) 11:23, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * What is that supposed to mean? Probably you have something meaningful in mind, but the sentence is so ill-formed that I don't understand it. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:26, 11 February 2011 (UTC)


 * A study showed that you can re-erupt Teide, El Teide has a structure similar to Vesuvius and Etna.--62.87.80.36 (talk) 13:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

You cannot re-erupt a volcano. A volcano goes through a cycle of eruptive activity, dormancy and finally extinction. When Teide will become active again is a matter of conjecture - it's last eruption from the summit cone was about 850AD and produced the "Lavas Negras" which blanket most of the flanks. There was concern that an eruptive cycle may have started in 2003/2004 but this apart from opening a rift on the north east flank and causing swelling produced no lava. Since then activity has returned to more normal background levels.The Geologist (talk) 16:37, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Mythological mountains
The Teide should go in Category: Mythological mountains and not in Category: Sacred mountains.


 * Mythological mountains are those that were sacred in the past: Teide, Olympus, Vesuvius etc.


 * Sacred mountains are those which are sacred today: Everest, Ararat, Uluru etc.

So is not the same, differences between the two.--88.13.74.233 (talk) 12:34, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

The descendants of the Guanches still consider it a Sacred mountain and do not like the way it is commercialised. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.170.197 (talk) 14:55, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

"development of the current Teide volcano took place in the five stages"
Then why did the description stopped after the paragraph "Stage four"? Avihu (talk) 20:05, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Main photograph
This photograph states that it is a view from the North. It is not, it is from the south overlooking the Ucanca Caldera, has Pico Viejo on the left (west) side and the saddle between Montana Blanca and Teide on the right (east) side. Also Teide slopes down to the forest on its northern side.The Geologist (talk) 14:59, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

That is not correct. The photograph is taken from NE of Teide summit, probably from Fortaleza. Montana Blanca is on the left of the picture and the view of Pico Viejo is blocked by Teide. Plantsurfer (talk) 10:58, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

The one that is there now but the one I wrote about was taken from Ucanca near the Zapatilla de la Reina pull off.The Geologist (talk) 17:17, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

The Facts!
if there is an eruption then the lava and debry will go into the sea and form a tidle wave or a tsunami it may hit some of the other canaries but will keep going until it hits a coast and it will hit america and all of the city's near the coats eg. Boston, New York... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.78.75 (talk) 21:02, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

An eruption on Tenerife may produce lava which enters the ocean. However out of the last 6 eruptions only one generated sufficient lavas that reached the ocean and that was the 1706 eruption. The 1492 eruption may have reached the ocean but that is not recorded. If, as I believe you claim by your term "tidle" wave (sic), the lava will form a TSUNAMI (which is NOT a tidal wave) when or if it enters the Atlantic Ocean, then boy are you in for a BIG surprise. Put simply it won't do anything of the sort. If you doubt that have a look at what is currently happening at Kilauea - lava regularly enters the Pacific Ocean, yet I do not recall being advised that a tsunami was heading out from Hawai'i. In other words your "science" is without foundation. The Geologist (talk) 12:44, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I know the mega-tsunami issue in connection with La Palma whose west side points to Miami... not Tenerife... There is La Palma, La Gomera and El Hierro in between...46.222.255.91 (talk) 23:10, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Teide. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20080614031136/http://www.webtenerife.com:80/PortalTenerife/Home/Disfruta+sin+perderte+nada/Mas+sobre+Tenerife/Naturaleza/Espacios+naturales/Parque+Nacional+de+El+Teide/Flora+del+Teide.htm?Lang=en to http://www.webtenerife.com/PortalTenerife/Home/Disfruta+sin+perderte+nada/Mas+sobre+Tenerife/Naturaleza/Espacios+naturales/Parque+Nacional+de+El+Teide/Flora+del+Teide.htm?Lang=en

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 12:12, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Third highest volcano?
Haleakala on Maui has to be higher; it's elevation above sea level is 3.055 km, just 1.152 km less than Mauna Kea on Hawaii, and the sea floor depth around the two neighboring Hawaiian islands must be similar. Given that Teide rises 7.5 km above the ocean floor while Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa both rise about 10.2, it isn't close.WolfmanSF (talk) 02:25, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I have added a reliable/reputable peer-reviewed source reference (Carrecedo et al. 2007) that states: "Teide Volcano, the third-highest volcanic feature on Earth (3718 m above sea level, >7 km high)".
 * Even though you have changed the text in the article from "the third highest volcano on a volcanic ocean island in the world after Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa in Hawaii" to "the highest volcano in the world base-to-peak outside of the Hawaiian Islands" which elegantly removes the point of contention, I think that a reliable source reference would still be required for your claim in the associated reference note about Haleakala being higher, otherwise retaining your unsourced claim about Haleakala as a note in the article probably breaches Wikipedia's policy of no original research (regardless of whether that research is factually accurate or not). GeoWriter (talk) 15:59, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, assuming a constant sea floor depth, there are 4 other extinct volcanoes in the Hawaiian Islands taller than or comparable in height to Teide (on 4 different islands); the less prominent active volcano Hualālai on the big island is also higher (see List of mountain peaks of Hawaii). So, your "reliable source" is nonsense. I have a source for Haleakala, but as a page from a tourist web site its obviously not what you're looking for. WolfmanSF (talk) 17:56, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not aware that the USGS's Hawaii Volcano Observatory or other US-based geologists have contested or disproved the 10-year-old statement in the Carracedo et al. (2007) peer-reviewed article published by the Geological Society of America. I wonder why? It is highly unlikely that they did not read it and they are also usually very proactive in publicising the world-record large dimensions of Hawaiian volcanoes.
 * I think the current/your wording in the article neatly avoids inaccuracy and controversy and, at the moment, I have no plans to change it. I can't say the same for your accompanying note about Haleakala and you now seem to be doing more (original) research, finding 4 other Hawaiian volcanoes. I'm not saying you are wrong about the sizes of Hawaiian volcanoes. I am saying that reliable source references are needed and original research is not allowed. For example, what is the source of your ocean floor depths in your calculations? If Carracedo et al. are wrong, I agree that a better source is needed. You already know that I think an unofficial, unsourced tourism website is not a reliable source, but why do you think it is reliable? If you  think the tourism website is not reliable, why have you cited it in the article's note? If another, better, source can be found listing 3 or more Hawaiian volcanoes that are higher than Teide, then that would change my opinion. So far, I have only seen reliable sources (both within and outside Wikipedia) for Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea. GeoWriter (talk) 12:49, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I doubt very much that USGS's Hawaii Volcano Observatory or other US-based geologists are particularly interested in disputing statements about which is Earth's 3rd tallest volcano. Also, I don't think comments on the talk page qualify as original research. As for the Haleakala mention in the note, I will switch to another source that says exactly the same thing (not that the accuracy of the statement was ever in doubt). WolfmanSF (talk) 19:00, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Teide the third-tallest volcanic structure
UNESCO: "Rising 7,500 m above the ocean floor, it is regarded as the world’s third-tallest volcanic structure and stands in a spectacular environment": Teide National Park. NASA: "The volcano rises 7,500 meters (24,606 feet) from the ocean floor, making it the third tallest volcanic structure on Earth": Tenerife, Canary Islands.

Greetings.--87.218.94.219 (talk) 09:37, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, the sources do not explain whether they are lumping Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa into a single "volcanic structure", whether they are ignoring Haleakala and/or other Hawaiian islands, or what. It sounds nice but doesn't mean much. WolfmanSF (talk) 09:56, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Well... Still, Teide is the third highest volcanic structure in the World. I think that in the "Notes" section this should be explained. --87.218.94.219 (talk) 10:47, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, we can say this. The real problem is that a comprehensive, accurate listing of base-to-peak heights of oceanic island peaks is probably not available to anyone. WolfmanSF (talk) 01:21, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

New official height/elevation for Teide?
This Wikipedia article states that the height of Teide is 3718 metres. This is given in many published sources, especially those published before about 2007, but it seems to be a now obsolete incorrect measurement. The height of Teide is given as 3715 metres on the Mapa Físico de España (Physical Map of Spain) (http://www2.ign.es/siane/Contenido.do?contenido=8691) in the Atlas Nacional de España (National Atlas of Spain) published in 2012 by Instituto Geográfico Nacional (Spain), the national mapping agency of the Government of Spain. The height is also given as 3715 metres on the 2015 edition of the map (http://centrodedescargas.cnig.es/CentroDescargas/busquedaRedirigida.do?ruta=PUBLICACION_CNIG_DATOS_VARIOS/MapasGenerales/Espana_Mapa-fisico-de-Espana-1-1.125.000_2015_mapa_16134_spa.pdf#). GeoWriter (talk) 22:33, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

IGN's MTN25 edición impresa: 2 (National Topographic Map 1:25000 second edition) map series of Tenerife, published in 2014, shows a WGS84 geodetic measuring point as 3707 metres located about 75 metres south-west of Teide's summit, and shows the height of Teide's summit as 3715 metres, 8 metres higher than the geodetic measurement point. See, for example, map sheet MTN25-1091c4-2014-La_Montanieta at http://centrodedescargas.cnig.es/CentroDescargas/buscar.do?filtro.codFamilia=02308&filtro.codCA=&filtro.codProv=&filtro.numeroHoja25=1091-4# GeoWriter (talk) 14:16, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

See also IGN's list of highest points in the provinces of Spain: http://www.ign.es/web/ign/portal/ane-datos-geograficos/-/datos-geograficos/datosGenerales?tipoBusqueda=altitudes which gives the height of Teide as 3715 metres. GeoWriter (talk) 10:44, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

For some background information about IGN's resurveying of the height of Teide, see this newspaper article published in 2007: https://www.laopinion.es/sociedad/2796/3715-metros-40-centimetros/87432.html (in Spanish). This article describes how Teide's height of 3715.4 ± 0.5 metres is relative to a 10-year mean sea level at Santa Cruz de Tenerife. GeoWriter (talk) 13:22, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

According to a Spanish cartography blog article "La Medida del Teide" (in Spanish, about the measurement of Teide) written in 2016: http://cartocan.blogspot.com/2016/02/la-medida-del-teide.html, IGN measured the height of Teide to be 3715.583 metres in December 2011, but a margin of error is not reported by the blogger. IGN's geodetic measurment of Teide as of 01 March 2019 at ftp://ftp.geodesia.ign.es/Red_Geodesica/Hoja1091/109180.pdf includes a map with Teide's summit height given as 3715 or 3716 metres. Unfortunately the numbers are difficult to read because of underlying contour lines. GeoWriter (talk) 16:35, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

The CIA World Factbook 2018-2019 gives Teide's height as 3718 metres on one page but 3715 metres on the next page. GeoWriter (talk) 16:47, 12 March 2019 (UTC)


 * The interactive version of the IGN Topographical map (accessed via the iOS app Gaia GPS) allows for much finer resolution than the image in the pdf. It does indeed say 3715 metres. Assuming IGN is the highest authority on matters of Spanish topography, it seems safe to just update the height in the article and remove the [disputed] tag at this point. Agree? Adrianrorheim (talk) 10:31, 25 November 2020 (UTC)


 * I have updated the article by changing the height of Teide from 3,718 m to 3,715 m. GeoWriter (talk) 14:56, 24 December 2020 (UTC)