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

United States: Texas Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as High-importance). Mountains High‑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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Climbing Guadalupe Peak should only be done if you are in good physical condition. The Park Service considers this to be a strenuous hike and would only be considered easy by veteran mountain climbers. I've been up there twice myself. For an easy hike, try McKittrick Canyon instead. H2O 00:43, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Texasbob---you should look at Wikipedia's policy on conflict of interest and policy on external links to see why your link is inappropriate and will continue to be deleted. -- Spireguy 21:37, 11 June 2007 (UTC) reply

The trail is stinky? I love Wikipedia! :-)-- TDKehoe ( talk) 19:03, 29 January 2011 (UTC) reply

@ Fotaun:: No offense intended, but I'm not sure I see what that blog post adds to the article. I've reverted the change for now; I can see that you're a constructive editor, and I'm open to being convinced that that link has a place here, if you care to advance an argument, but right now I don't see what's particularly noteworthy about that post.- Bryanrutherford0 ( talk) 18:04, 10 June 2016 (UTC) reply

No problem, it is the nature of a collaborative editing that our work is (thankfully) checked by others. Your opinion matters and thanks for the constructive feedback and explanation. I had never heard of this peak till that article, although it is humorous, I learned more in 60 seconds about this Texas peak then before. Fotaun ( talk) 12:16, 11 June 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Guadalupe Peak. 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/20080116113632/http://erg.usgs.gov/isb/pubs/booklets/elvadist/elvadist.html to http://erg.usgs.gov/isb/pubs/booklets/elvadist/elvadist.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) 20:57, 25 March 2017 (UTC) reply