Talk:Magnetic Hill (Moncton)
|WikiProject Canada / New Brunswick / Geography||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
The Canadian province or the town in New Jersey?
Acegikmo1 03:52, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Ah, thanks. Is it part of a particular city or is it a city itself (or neither)?
- Acegikmo1 19:35, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Not the only magnetic hill!
The article is written as Moncton has the only magnetic hill. I pressume the author didn't realize there are two in Canada. The other is located in Burlington, Ontario. If no one fixes this article, I'll do it when I've got some time :) Mrtea 00:33, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
- Okay I skimmed over that too fast, sorry! I didn't realize Magnetic Hill was actually the name of the landmark and gravity hill is its "scientific" name. Burlington also uses the title Magnetic Hill and not gravity hill. --Mrtea 00:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
Photographs at Magnetic Hill in Ladakh Region in India are added to the article.
Gktambe 20:40, December 29th, 2006.
- Please understand that this article is about the Magnetic Hill in Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada. Thus, pictures of a different "magnetic hill" in India are irrelevant, and should not be added to this article. However, feel free to add them to other appropriate articles (as you have on the article for Gravity hill) to illustrate the subject in question. If you feel that there may be a legitimate reason to include these pictures in this article (Magnetic Hill), please discuss it here, rather than re-adding the pictures. See the welcome page for more information about Wikipedia. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Keith Davies Lehwald 20:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Deletion of the photographs
Hi, I was not aware that this Article is only about the Magnetic Hill in Canada. A care should be taken to be specific in naming the article. To avoid further confusion, I think the page should be renamed as the Magnetic Hill of Canada.Thanks. Gktambe22.10 January 7th 2007.
Photos do not illustrate illusion
The caption on the first photo flatly declares that the white post appears to be at the lowest point in the road. Well, it doesn't. The perspective/topographical curve of the grass at the berm makes it clear that post is on an upward slope. What actually appears to be the lowest point is 20 to 30 feet closer to the camera. I think this caption is attempting to force the photo to depict something it does not. Jtcarpet (talk) 07:39, 6 February 2014 (UTC)