Having one page for both of these peaks makes perfect sense. However, because this page is titled "The Craggies" the page doesn't pop up in the basic search engine's results for a person looking for info on this peak. Or at least it does not do so if you are like me and you looked for Big Craggy, West Craggy or Craggy. Only a search for the plural Craggies returns this page and Craggies is not likely to be entered as the search term as it isn't part of the name of either mtn. No big deal, don't wanna be crabby about craggy, but just thought I would point out this minor issue.
Thanks, Eric.
This page was put up before sp v2 so before the search utility. I have added "Big Craggy" and "West Craggy" to the query field so now the page should come up with just 'craggy' entered. Try it and respond if it doesn't.
I see "Andys Noel" got renamed to Prominencians Peak. Your semi-claim to fame has been erased. Oh well. I may go and get this little humdinger of a peak later this year.
It pops up on a search for craggy so it seems you've fixed it to work with the newer search engine.
Yeah I lost my chance for naming rights as JR of course was the first (known) person up that little mtn. Oh well, fame is fleeting although for a claim to fame a hill in the Blue Mtns which falls on a list that about 5 people know about is pretty damn obscure but I'll take what I can get.
I thought I had that county covered after doing Diamond Peak last year so I've had to add that back onto the list although I needed to head back out that way anyway for Saddle Butte as well.
I completely disagree with Eric's original sentiment from 2006... There should be a separate page for Big Craggy and West Craggy. REASONS:
-> These are separate mountains, and qualify as separate mountains due to their prominences.
-> Their summits separated by a mile or so... it is not like these are a couple of sub-summits.
-> These are separate peaks on the Washington Top 100 list, and as such each deserves to have individual recognition.
-> Those are not even the only "Craggies" there... "North Craggy" is also nearby.
-> It appears the first five people who signed the SP climber's log only did Big Craggy, not West Craggy. So the climber's log for "The Craggies" is a tad inaccurate for some people if they only climb one particular peak.
-> After reading through the summit registers atop each peak, there were quite a few people who did one peak but not the other, such as Big Craggy but not West Craggy, or West Craggy but not Big Craggy. Or sometimes one peak was done years after the other.
The information is very good, but I tend to agree with Craig. It might be a hassle to divide the pages now, but one of two things should happen, there should be one page for each peak, or the page should be changed to an area/range page and further describe Isabella Ridge. Anything less than these options doesn't keep with current standards for the site.
ericnoel - Jul 4, 2006 8:09 am - Voted 10/10
Craggy SearchHaving one page for both of these peaks makes perfect sense. However, because this page is titled "The Craggies" the page doesn't pop up in the basic search engine's results for a person looking for info on this peak. Or at least it does not do so if you are like me and you looked for Big Craggy, West Craggy or Craggy. Only a search for the plural Craggies returns this page and Craggies is not likely to be entered as the search term as it isn't part of the name of either mtn. No big deal, don't wanna be crabby about craggy, but just thought I would point out this minor issue.
Klenke - Jul 6, 2006 7:35 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: Craggy SearchThanks, Eric.
This page was put up before sp v2 so before the search utility. I have added "Big Craggy" and "West Craggy" to the query field so now the page should come up with just 'craggy' entered. Try it and respond if it doesn't.
I see "Andys Noel" got renamed to Prominencians Peak. Your semi-claim to fame has been erased. Oh well. I may go and get this little humdinger of a peak later this year.
Paul
ericnoel - Jul 8, 2006 6:51 am - Voted 10/10
Re: Craggy SearchIt pops up on a search for craggy so it seems you've fixed it to work with the newer search engine.
Yeah I lost my chance for naming rights as JR of course was the first (known) person up that little mtn. Oh well, fame is fleeting although for a claim to fame a hill in the Blue Mtns which falls on a list that about 5 people know about is pretty damn obscure but I'll take what I can get.
I thought I had that county covered after doing Diamond Peak last year so I've had to add that back onto the list although I needed to head back out that way anyway for Saddle Butte as well.
-Eric
Redwic - Jul 14, 2013 1:00 am - Hasn't voted
I Respectfully DisagreeI completely disagree with Eric's original sentiment from 2006... There should be a separate page for Big Craggy and West Craggy. REASONS:
-> These are separate mountains, and qualify as separate mountains due to their prominences.
-> Their summits separated by a mile or so... it is not like these are a couple of sub-summits.
-> These are separate peaks on the Washington Top 100 list, and as such each deserves to have individual recognition.
-> Those are not even the only "Craggies" there... "North Craggy" is also nearby.
-> It appears the first five people who signed the SP climber's log only did Big Craggy, not West Craggy. So the climber's log for "The Craggies" is a tad inaccurate for some people if they only climb one particular peak.
-> After reading through the summit registers atop each peak, there were quite a few people who did one peak but not the other, such as Big Craggy but not West Craggy, or West Craggy but not Big Craggy. Or sometimes one peak was done years after the other.
Just my two cents.
gimpilator - Jul 14, 2013 11:44 am - Hasn't voted
Re: I Respectfully DisagreeThe information is very good, but I tend to agree with Craig. It might be a hassle to divide the pages now, but one of two things should happen, there should be one page for each peak, or the page should be changed to an area/range page and further describe Isabella Ridge. Anything less than these options doesn't keep with current standards for the site.