Talk:Monte Pissis

Reverted link

I reverted the external link for the following reasons, as per WP:EL. (1) It's not very necessary as it does not add much info beyond what is on, say, the Summitpost page. (2) It's a semi-commercial link. (3) It's in Spanish, and this is the English Wikipedia, so English-language links are preferred. -- Spireguy 04:15, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I reverted the same link again, for the same reasons outlined above. If the user who keeps inserting this link wishes to make a case for it, he/she should present their reasons on this talk page (after reading the external links guidelines) instead of simply re-inserting the link. It would also help if the person became a registered user instead of continuing to edit anonymously. -- Spireguy 03:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted the same link again, for the above reasons and, because the EIR elevation highlighted is not the geoid corrected elevation, and are therefore not correct. Please respond to the above message before re-inserting these links. Otherwise they will continue to be reverted. Viewfinder 14:47, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

This mountain does not make 6,800m. If someone insist in posting the incorrect height of 6,882m I can add additional sources stating the opposite. --Silvio1973 (talk) 05:24, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

We have plenty of sources, both GPS and satellite, in complete agreement with yours. But where official government sources persist in misinforming the world by contradicting the proven truth, we at Wikipedia should be nailing these sources. Incidentally if the government of Argentina cannot tell the truth about the heights of its mountains, why should anyone believe its claims about crime and inflation? And why should the Falkland/Malvinas islanders believe its reassurances? Viewfinder (talk) 12:01, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, the thing is that I have been on that mountain along with other five or six people and we all measured 6.800 m +/- 10m with our GPS. I don't know if the issue is comparable to the Falklands. Here we speak of numbers... I have modified the article. For me there is no dispute. Reporting as dispute this it is like reporting in the article Earth, the conclusion of someone insisting against all evidence the Earth is flat. --Silvio1973 (talk) 10:14, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your edits. There is no dispute - except with the official figure published by the government of Argentina. Viewfinder (talk) 19:41, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Height

I have been on top of Pissis. My GPS marked 6,795m. Yes the height claimed at 6,882 is wrong. --Silvio1973 (talk) 12:02, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Alt name: Nevado Pissis

I've created a redirect per pl wiki, but could use a double check - @Jo-Jo Eumerus _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:18, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Laguna Negra

The Polish article at https://web.archive.org/web/20230616174507/https://spg.apsl.edu.pl/baza/wydawn/spg13/marek.pdf (which did not mention the first ascent claim) also says something about "discovery of the mountain lake Laguna Negra" implying it was related to the Polish climbers ascent of this mountain? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:17, 24 August 2023 (UTC)