Talk:Old Faithful

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 18, 2017 and September 18, 2020.

Geology Mid‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Old Faithful 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Wyoming High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Wyoming portal This article is supported by WikiProject Wyoming (assessed as High-importance).

Coordinates[edit]

The two coordinate template {{Geolinks-US-streetscale}} and {{CoorHeader}} are superimposed in this page on Firefox... Circeus 16:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Smell[edit]

Does someone know how the Old Faithful Geyser smells? Thank you --Gaborgulya 19:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Old Faithful smells like sulfer, or rotten eggs. I can say this because I have been to Old Faithful Xdragon5 16:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Age[edit]

Does anyone know hold old it is??? Thanks--

No one knows the age. It (probably) existed long before European explorers came to America. Xdragon5 16:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Average[edit]

I am assuming since the "average" time between eruptions is 91 minutes, the number of times the interval lasts 91-92 minutes far outnumber those that are lower. However, the article implies the interval is either 65 minutes or 92 minutes, which leads me to believe "short" intervals must occur reasonably enough to receive mention, therefore making the average time between eruptions something like 80 minutes, instead of 91. Furthermore, if the interval is either 65 or 92 minutes, then saying it is 65-92 is misleading- it implies the intervals can be 66 minutes, 79 minutes, 87, etc., etc. Can someone please clarify? -- Sarrandúin ^{[ Talk + Contribs ]} 06:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The interval is certainly not 65 or 92 minutes. I accept the article's statement as to that range (65 to 92 minutes) but the interval is most typically pretty close to 90 minutes. But, I think that indeed, the interval could be anything in there, as you say - 66, 79, 87, 70... Cheers Geologyguy 03:14, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The 65–92 range from the NPS Online Tour site is wrong, or at least misleading, as this is not a range. It is a bimodal geyser, with long eruptions usually about 90 minutes, and the now-rarer short intervals about 65 minutes. I updated the range to be a true range, based on the good GOSA ref that was recently added. Or, it could be reworded to emphasize the bimodal nature of the geyser vs using a range... --GregU 18:28, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which state?[edit]

Someone add this pls.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.232.121.101 (talk) 17:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added

-Added so nobody goes and checks and wastes a minute of their time ( As I just did). Eruditess (talk) 23:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Scientific Explanation?[edit]

Does anyone know the scientific explanation for the regularity of this geyser? --209.167.191.66 (talk) 13:43, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

R (programming language)[edit]

R has data on the Old Faithful Geyser (just type ?faithful to get it), and it references two articles:

Härdle, W. (1991) Smoothing Techniques with Implementation in S. New York: Springer.
Azzalini, A. and Bowman, A. W. (1990). A look at some data on the Old Faithful geyser. Applied Statistics 39, 357–365.

I don't know if this could be useful to the article. Albmont (talk) 18:31, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive pictures?[edit]

As I was randomly scrolling through the articles, I found that my eye tended to be sidetracked by the pictures...most of which had no notable difference from each other. Any comments? I c eUnshattered ^{[ t ]} 22:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adpated GEOBOX2 Template Added[edit]

Geobox2 is supposed to be a universal template for Geographic features. Its been adapted to this geyser article. Because this is the first time its been used on a geyser article--that I can tell, I've left all the parameters intact so others can mess with it. The template is lacking on some parameters necessary for geo-thermal features and I've raised that issue here.--Mike Cline (talk) 19:55, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another alternative is to use an infobox derivative - it seems to be easier to change. I tossed one together and put together a demo page: User:CosmicPenguin/Hotspring Demo. Feel free to put whatever you need into the template User:CosmicPenguin/Infobox hot spring - if we are happy with it then we can put it in the main space and start converting the articles over. CosmicPenguin (Talk) 04:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CP - Looks like a good solution. It will force me to learn a bit more about the backend of templates. Good Job!--Mike Cline (talk) 11:58, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is regularly disputed - Comment removed from History section[edit]

Although the comment This is regularly disputed may or maynot be true, adding it within the Blockquote is inappropriate, as Winser did not say that in his book. If the story Winser tells is in dispute, then please provide a source and context for that dispute. Although I am not an expert on Old Faithful or other geysers, I have yet to find any authoritative work that disputes the claim in Winser's work. If it exists, please provide it.--Mike Cline (talk) 14:03, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of research shows that this sentiment was confirmed by the NPS in their publication: YELLOWSTONE NATURE NOTES Vol. XV January-February, 1938 Nos. 1-2 [1]

The early visitors did not hesitate to throw logs and stones into the orifice in order that they might witness them being hurled high into the air at the next eruption. At various times this world famous geyser has been made to serve as a laundry, not only for the casual visitor but at least upon one occasion for a visiting contingent U. S. Army whose commanding officer stated that all types of clothing were excellently washed excepting woolen garments which were torn into shreds when shot high into the air from the rough throat of the geyser.

--Mike Cline (talk) 14:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This image[edit]

Is this image Old Faithful at yellowstone Park: File:Yellowstone-DC4.jpg or another body of water? If it is, it would be a useful addition to this article. Regards --Leoboudv (talk) 06:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those of us that have been working on the geyser and park articles are unsure as to what hot spring this is. It is most likely in the Upper Geyser Basin. The uploader did not identify it. However, it is not Old Faithful. Does anyone know the identity of this spring?--Mike Cline (talk) 14:27, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is Crested Pool. The edge is a give-away and compare the picture with the one from the article - they are from the same vantage point: File:Crested Pool.JPG. CosmicPenguin (talk• WP:WYO^Help!) 21:19, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Cosmic Penguin! I didn't think it was Old Faithful...it would have been too hazardous to one's health to be that close to that Geyser. I shall fill in the missing information for that photo. With kind Regards from Canada, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:22, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rationale For Removing Links to Date of Discovery[edit]

A recent edit removed the date links to September 18 and 1870. What was the rationale for this? Is there a guideline in play here? Old Faithful is listed as a notable event on the September 18 date page. Absent a specific guideline that discourages these links, it would seem that these are appropriate wikilinks. Absent these types of links on other pages, few readers would navigate to DOY pages.--Mike Cline (talk) 12:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Small eruption window?[edit]

Under Old_Faithful#Eruptions, the article says, It's popularity is more likely due to the small eruption window and high frequency. Could somebody explain what eruption window means, and how it differs from frequency? -- RoySmith (talk) 16:56, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eruption window is the length of time that it is expected the next eruption time to vary from. Some geysers are predictable, so, they can say "5:10" or whenever, plus or minus 10 minutes. So it is expected to erupt within a 20 minute time frame (this is actually true, I have been to Upper Geyser Basin). atomic 77 32 17:37, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Video format[edit]

Why is the video not in some standard format like MP4, AVI, or WMV?

WTF is "ogg"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.249 (talk) 22:11, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ogg - There you go. DrkBlueXG (talk) 18:03, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs more information on the human infrastructure[edit]

This article doesn't appear to have anything currently on what sort of infrastructure or policies have been made for tourists coming to see the geyser. How many people visit annually? How close can you get (and how close could you get in the past)? Etc. The scientific info is nice, but it's only part of what this article should be. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:13, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The picture[edit]

The picture seems to be of too high quality to be from 1948. Wolf O'Donnel (talk) 01:04, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably colored in or edited and whatnot. watermelon66 (talk) 13:11, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]