The mountain lists
On the westcoastpeaks.com mountain lists, a mountain is ranked if the mountain's primary factor (PF, see below) is equal to, or greater than 100m. The mountain height is irrelevant, as long it is 100m or higher.
This does not mean that a top with a lower primary factor is less worth! 100m is just a chosen cut-off, subjective to this site, but also frequently used internationally for defining a mountain top. It could have been 50m, and it could have been 150m. The cut-off needs to be there, otherwise the lists of named and unnamed tops, pinnacles, humps and bumps would have been an impossible task.
A blue symbol indicates that the mountain is ranked. A green symbol indicates that the PF is between 90 and 99m. In some cases, accurate measurement MAY shift the PF above 100m. The opposite is true of course - a ranked top can shift it's PF to below 100m.
You may also come across lists where the tops have a primary factor between 50 and 100m. These tops are marked with a red symbol.
The mountain names are derived from the maps. If the top has other names (and a large number of them do), the other names will be listed as well. If the top does not have a name, you'll see entries as Kvitegga W-1. This means that Kvitegga is the nearest dominating mountain, and the top in question is the first top on the western ridge.
A mountain's height is assigned based on sources in the following order; a) Økonomisk Kartverk (Norgesglasset ,1:5000, Statens Kartverk), b) Norge 1:50,000 (Statens Kartverk), c) Personal GPS measurement, other maps, or other sources on the Internet. Mountains without a map height will get the same height as the highest contour (if the terrain suggest so). Unfortunately, this has not been quite consistent. Often, 1m has been added, but not always. In some cases, the mountain height has also been interpolated based on the available contour information.
It is not optimal to use heights from Økonomisk Kartverk (ØK), as this is a map that is not available in printed form. But since ØK is often use to get a finer PF precision in calculating the PF, the height from the same map also needs to be used.
The function of the PF is to a) have a cut-off level for identifying mountain tops and b) sort the mountain lists on PF to identify very prominent mountains with amazing views
Ref. the above image, the question is if Rørene is a ranked (independent) top towards the higher mountain Myklebosthornet. In order to find the answer, we need to know the height of Rørene and of the lowest point between the two tops. If the difference is 100m or more, then this site considers Rørene to be an independent top.
Another way of visualising the PF is this; suppose the sea level rose to the extent that the mountain in question becomes the HIGHEST mountain on the newly founded island. The difference between the new sea level and the mountain height is the primary factor. Example:
Rørene's height is 295m. Since the sea level (after this sudden climate change) now is 223m, Rørene's PF is 72m.
In the U.S, the primary factor is often called prominence (prom.). Visit this site, and you'll learn everything you never wanted to know on this topic.
One calculates the PF in three ways; a) no interpolation, b) averaged interpolation and c) optimistic interpolation. No interpolation means that the lowest contour defines the lowest point (the saddle) between two peaks. This is a safe method, the PF will then never be too high. Averaged interpolation means to average on the available contours. This means that on a 20m contour map, if the 1320m contours for the two tops meet, then we average the lowest point to 1310m. This means that the PF sometimes will be too high. Optimistic interpolation means that if the 1320m contours meet, then the low point can actually be 1301m. This site uses averaged interpolation for calculating PF.
There are some exceptions to averaged interpolation: a) the map states a saddle height, and b) an analysis of the terrain. Let's assume there is a lake (1312m) near the saddle. The lake drains south, so the saddle has to be on the north side. The saddle height can then not be 1310m, otherwise the lake would have drained two ways. The saddle is then interpolated between 1312m and 1320m. Knowledge about the terrain will supersede interpolations. If we know that we just pass 2m above this lake, then the saddle will be defined as 1314m.
A rough (but good enough) location estimate taken from Garmin's MapSource maps. For the peaks I have visited, the actual GPS location supersede the map data and is showed in italic letters.
(*) This means that a mountain's summit is located on a kommune border
(**) This means that a mountain's summit is located on a three-kommune border
The table is sorted by the mountain's height. The three highest mountains sorted by primary factor have been given these superscript annotations.