Talk:List of caves

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caves, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of caving and cave articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CavesWikipedia:WikiProject CavesTemplate:WikiProject CavesCaves articles

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Geology Low‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:List of caves is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Jagdalpur#Kailash Caves.5B21.5D|Kailash Caves]]

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of caves. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:22, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of caves. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120402093902/http://www.darklife.co.za/Caves/5.Other_areas/Zimbabwe/Chimanimani.html to http://www.darklife.co.za/Caves/5.Other_areas/Zimbabwe/Chimanimani.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:43, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redlinks and U.S. State Deletion Proposal and pictures[edit]

I was thinking over the redlinks again. I think this list should be a list of caves with wikipedia articles. I know we can cite anything without its own article, but I think we can also refine the purpose of this list to omit redlinks. As a wikipedia article, it only seems worth our time to link to wikipedia articles.

Also, I was thinking since I adjusted everything to columns, that having all the U.S. States listed, doesn't seem necessary, and I don't know that it ever was to begin with. At the very least, I think the states should be subcategorized and alphabetized.

I think one other thing we should do is to limit all the pictures to the top of a regional section (like they are now), and limit them to no more than 5 per region. Leitmotiv (talk) 19:19, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Linking only to things which already have articles limits Wikipedia's growth and presents an incomplete view of the subject. Besides that's what categories are for. Rmhermen (talk) 04:40, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having this conversation on the Wiki List manual of style, and it seems to be a reasonable thing to do. Leitmotiv (talk) 04:50, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Leitmotiv, those columns make this practically unreadable (I can't imagine how it formats on mobile), do you mind if I take them out? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:43, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Define practically unreadable. Leitmotiv (talk) 23:55, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Like...just entirely difficult to parse visually (and I'm neurotypical; I can't imagine how it looks to a dyslexic person). It's crowded as hell and it makes it hard to find what country you're looking for - the countries are technically alphabetized, but they wind up in quite a mess because of the columns. Scroll to the top of Europe for example and you see Armenia, Austria, a bunch of stuff that isn't under a header, Gibraltar (not even a country), Poland, and more unheadered stuff.

Can I suggest a layout more like List of villages in Bangladesh, where the individual sections are columnized under each header? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:47, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The villages in Bangladesh list is essentially what we have now, except grouped by country instead of alphabetically. Also, the cave list has one additional sublisting for country. So, in other words, the Bangladesh list is sorted by "A" villages, then lists all villages under A. The Cave list is sorted by "Continent" then every "Country" and then every individual "Cave". I don't know how you are going to get the simplicity of the Bangladesh list, unless we restructure the list entirely. I suppose you can rework the list, and if we don't like it, we can always revert. Leitmotiv (talk) 00:57, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, also, we should probably do away with redlinks altogether. I mean, take away the brackets and leave the refs up (AKA a blacklink?). There's no promise any of these redlinks will ever have articles, so they're just an eyesore. Leitmotiv (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the headings that are the problem, it's the 15em columns encompassing the entirety of each continent, causing the sub-headings to be crammed into confusing columns. Look how it displays on my laptop screen; it's all over the place. Compare the second screenshot, which I took of an unsaved preview edit (I removed the image for now for simplicity's sake). Each sub-heading has its own columns, so it still saves on whitespace, but the subheadings themselves remain organized. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:04, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of caves as it is now
List of caves formatted like the list of villages

Leitmotiv, sorry to ping you again, but - any further thoughts? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:22, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I said you could edit it. Looks fine. Leitmotiv (talk) 18:39, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, god, I'm not sure how I managed to not see that. Sorry :| ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:19, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Organization of the list[edit]

Leitmotiv, thanks for putting up with my itch to organize lists :) I'm wondering if this article can/should be streamlined more. There are some sections that absolutely dominate, due to size of territory and/or large amounts of cave-prone geology. What are your thoughts on trimming those down in this main list to maybe like, 8-10 primary caves, and putting the rest into "List of caves in X country" articles. That way this article remains a useful top-level reference for the most notable caves in each country, without being redundant to the list of caves in X articles. It also allows the country list articles to blossom as more of an in-depth look at each country's caves, potentially organized by national sub-divisions, and including more detail than this article is really suited to. (I'm sorry in advance. I'm such a nerd about lists.) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:36, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apologize. I'm ambivalent about trimming the list. It makes sense at some point to trim it, but I don't necessarily feel that time is now. The longer the list goes on, the longer and more unwieldy the list becomes. But I'm just one guy. I'd like to see what others have to say about trimming the list. Leitmotiv (talk) 20:41, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For sure, no rush. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:56, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]