Talk:List of peaks named Signal

This article was nominated for deletion on 13 August 2015. The result of the discussion was keep.

This set index article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Lists Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Mountains This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain articles

I don't want this to get lost. Mount Signal is a major mountain dominating over part of the U.S., including Mount Signal, California, a town named for it. It seems to be one of Mexico's tallest 30 mountains, in terms of prominence (height relative to nearby area). It is also known by Mexicans as "Sentry Mountain" in Spanish, El Cerro Centinella. See more details at Talk:List of mountain peaks of Mexico#Mount Signal, Baja California.

Mount Signal, viewed from the Imperial Valley, California.

One editor's changed its appearance on the Signal Mountain disambiguation page so that the entry no longer explains that it is called Mount Signal by anyone. Because of that, or because it is a red-link which are not usually allowed in a "See also" section, it was simply deleted rather than transferred (along with Canadian peak), into this article.

Whatever happens in the AFD, this one and the Canadian one should be covered in one or both articles, if both survive. --doncram 18:42, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If a mountains editor would like to create the article as a stub, that would be good, and would remove some confusion here. At this point I think the article should be created at El Centinella (mountain) (currently a redlink), as Google maps calls it that if you zoom close enough as in this Google map view. And Signal Mountain, Baja California should be a redirect to it, reflecting what seems to be the most common usage in the U.S. area that it overlooks. --doncram 20:12, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This mountain is now listed in the article, so I guess this i okay/done. --doncram 02:36, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The info in the article got changed to refer to a different El Centinella in Colima State, Mexico which is far away and is not the mountain also known as "Mount Signal". I see that the Peakbagger page about the Colima mountain does verify that is a mountain, so disambiguation between the two mountains is needed, and both mountains would belong on a page about mountains named Sentinel Peak or the like. But again it is one that does not belong on the List of peaks named Signal Mountain page. --doncram 12:07, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The table has elevation info but not topographic prominence; prominence is more important in showing how major a given mountain is. See List of mountain peaks of Mexico for a good WikiProject Mountains' example of list with elevation, prominence, and also isolation listed for each one.

Whether or not prominence for all is added, Mount Wilkinson, formerly known as Signal Mountain, should be added to the U.S. table of mountains, IMHO. The list should not be limited to places named "Signal Mountain" in the USGS database. It is a "low mountain", so it must have some prominence, although it is apparently at a fairly low elevation and is even lower than average land in its general area, as it is in a valley. So it may appear odd if only its elevation is shown. It is in Cobb County, Georgia, in the greater Atlanta area. --doncram 20:12, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Prominence being added in revised table, and this one is in, so  Done --doncram 02:36, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The AFD about this article is still going on. At issue partly is whether this list-article will serve the disambiguation function previously served by the separate dab page. It will not serve that if it does not include the kind of reasonable, identifying text about items that was in the disambiguation page. The table may provide elevation and coordinates and some other information beyond what is in a usual disambiguation page, but the table also has to allow for reasonable text.

This page does not yet serve the disambiguating function well enough yet to substitute for the dab page, IMO, at least in the case of Signal Mountain, Tennessee and the Signal Mountain which is the colloquial name for a part of the Walden Ridge near the town. (Per this past version of the disambiguation page). I am not sure but I think the town is on Walden Ridge, too, and the Signal Mountain is a peak of Walden Ridge that overlooks it. In the current article, there is not text explaining that context. The current table includes Signal Mountain, Tennessee as an item, but that is not a mountain, rather it is a town. The Walden Ridge peak needs to be an item. Offhand I think it should be an unlinked item, not a redlink calling for an article to be created. The town needs to be mentioned in this page, at least in a description or otherwise-labelled explanatory text about the Walden Ridge peak.

Also the altitude given in the table for the Signal Mountain, Tennessee item is lower than the altitude for the town that is given in its article. Can these points be addressed, please? --doncram 15:28, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Vermont article, Signal Mountain (Vermont) reports elevation 1030 m, while the table here and GNIS reference report 1013 m. Which should change? Or should they be left different for some reason? --doncram 02:36, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1. I think we shouldn't distinguish US peaks in a separate table, but combine all peaks into one (per List of peaks named Kennedy).
2. I also think that this list should be moved to List of peaks named Signal, and have notable peaks (such as Signal Hill, New Zealand) added to it
3. We need to decide what the listing criteria is -- I think trying to list all peaks named signal is too much junk data. We could start the discussion at WT:WikiProject Mountains. I was waiting until the formatting had settled down before starting the discussion, but perhaps the time is ripe now. —hike395 (talk) 03:58, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One nice objective listing criterion is a prominence cutoff --- I wonder if we should simply list all peaks with >100m of prominence? —hike395 (talk) 04:07, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]