Talk:Massif

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject 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 Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information)
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ]
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale for WikiProject Mountains.
If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments.
Earth sciences Portal
Massif is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Massif

  • Other. Currenly dic def. Should probably be moved to Wiktionary (I don't know how, and can't find docs), then replaced with a disambig page like this[1]. (Not sure this is the best place to list this, but it doesn't seem to qualify for either needs attention or clean up) Niteowlneils 21:41, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
  • If it can be turned into an article, keep; otherwise delete or move to Wiktionary. Rainier Schmidt 23:19, Mar 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Perhaps a redirect to the Massif Central, a major French geological region, might be appropriate? Ddama
  • Delete. The procedure to move an article that was submitted to the wrong wikimedia project is at m:transwiki. Oh, by the way, transwiki to Wiktionary right before deletion. Gentgeen 10:51, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep (rewritten). Important geologic term in English deserving of article. Many examples. -- Decumanus | Talk 19:02, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep with changes. Note, I've copied the 20:21, 23 Jul 2003 version text to Wiktionary--someone who is more familiar with the process may want to see if I did it right. Niteowlneils 19:49, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
  • It now seems to be a pretty decent article, so I'm changing my vote to keep. Rainier Schmidt 01:45, Mar 24, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Useful geographic as well as geological term. -- ChrisO 12:30, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)