Talk:Wuyi Mountains
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wuyi Mountains article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The contents of the Wuyi Shan page were merged into Wuyi Mountains on 14 July 2016. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
.......hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.60.70.121 (talk) 00:38, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
World heritage site area size
editIf the "The mountains cover an area of 60 km²" how come that "The world heritage site has an area of 999.75 square kilometres within an additional buffer zone of 278.88 km²"? I admit that those numbers were taken from UNESCO site, but this does make sense, especially after reading in the only reference in the article (Britannica Educational Publishing (2010). The Geography of China: Sacred and Historic Places) the following sentence: "A protected area of about 38 square miles (100 square km) was designated a UNESCO World Heritage site in 1999." Could it be that all the UNESCO site numbers should be divided be 10? Avihu (talk) 18:38, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
The UNESCO numbers, i.e., around 1,000 km² appear to match the extent of the area on the map better than the unsourced 60 km², so I suggest using the UNESCO numbers rm (talk) 13:49, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Cathayshan or Cathaysian?
editSearching for the term "Cathayshan fold system" in the geology section of the article I came across a similar term, but with slightly different spelling: Cathaysian. See for example in Glossary of history, but more importantly in Uranium Deposits of the World: Asia or Structural development of the Lower Paleozoic belt of South China: Genesis of an intracontinental orogen. Avihu (talk) 20:18, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Good point, I think it should be Cathaysian rm (talk) 13:49, 9 February 2013 (UTC)