Talk:Sistema Ox Bel Ha

(Redirected from Talk:Ox Bel Ha Cave System)
Latest comment: 10 months ago by Pbsouthwood in topic Surveyed length?

Requested move

edit
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)Reply



Ox Bel Ha Cave SystemSistema Ox Bel HaSistema 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)Reply

Survey

edit
Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', 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

edit
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)Reply

Surveyed length?

edit

Sistema_Ox_Bel_Ha#cite_note-CINDAQ-2 gives the surveyed length with 435.805 km (270.797 mi) 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 (215.490 mi). According to historical data of the QRSS the largest increase in surveyed length happened with 44.5 km (27.7 mi) 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 (55 mi) 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)Reply

Both? (with explanation) · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 10:07, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply