Talk:Shivling (mountain)

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

India: Uttarakhand / Geography Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Uttarakhand (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by the Indian geography workgroup (assessed as Mid-importance). Mountains Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Note: {{WP India}} Project Banner with Uttarakhand workgroup parameters was added to this article talk page because the article falls under Category:Uttarakhand or its subcategories. Should you feel this addition is inappropriate , please undo my changes and update/remove the relavent categories to the article -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 13:57, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it seems lossy, many of the most important ascents (Scott & C. 1981, Bonington 1983, Bernasconi-Manoni-Rosso 1986, Hainz-Kammerlander 1993, Thomas Huber 2000) but mentioning "indiancentric" details: the youngest person who climbed the mountain could have some enciclopedic interest for a 8000, whereas who were "the first successful summiters of India, as a part of a total civilian effort i.e without any army support" has no enciclopedic meaning at all (and could be faulty).--Sivanarayana (talk) 18:44, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]