Talk:Mount Everest

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Mount Everest was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Mountains (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Nepal (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nepal, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Nepal-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. WikiProject icon
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject New Zealand (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject China (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject East Asia (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of East Asia 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Geology (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Mount Everest 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Climbing (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climbing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climbing 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
 
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / Vital
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.

Notable climbing records request (another)[edit]

There is a mistake in the following statement "The next summiting was on May 23, 1956 by Ernst Schmied and Juerg Marmet.[62] This was followed by Dölf Reist and Hans-Rudolf von Gunten on May 24, 1957.[62] After this, the next summiting was not until Jim Whittaker and Nawang Gombu on May 1, 1963"

On 25 May 1960, Chinese expedition team, Wang Fuzhou, Qu Yinhua and Gongbu became the first to reach the summit of Mount Everest via the north face.

See http://www.cctv.com/english/special/tibet/20091014/103993.shtml — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.206.25.161 (talk) 10:12, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

First? Really?[edit]

  • "The goal of reaching Everest's summit for the first time was initially taken up by tenacious British mountaineers."

I don't believe this. Is the argument that people from Nepal and Tibet never tried to reach the summit over the hundreds (thousands?) of years they have occupied this part of the world? This is world history, as told by Westerners. Liz Read! Talk! 16:42, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

True, but there's a big difference between recorded history and speculative history. You could make this claim about many things.. who was really first to the poles, or to cross various deserts, to sail certain seas? How did the Native Americans and Aboriginals get to Australia and America and evolve apart from westerners, would that not make their descendants the true "first" crossings? All we can do as historians is go by what we know, not what we believe. Bear in mind that it is still unknown if Mallory and Irvine ever reached the summit and died on descent in 1924, and so we credit Hillary and Norgay in 1953 – we could be wrong, but until someone finds the camera Mallory had, we will never truly know. The same goes for much of history where there is a complete lack of evidence, only speculation. We're not here to theorise, however, that's not what an encyclopedia does. Ma®©usBritish{chat} 17:54, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Well put, but I wonder if we might say something like this instead: "The first recorded efforts to reach Everest's summit were made by British mountaineers". That would remove the claim that the British were the first to have the goal of summiting (which, even if there's a source that explicitly says it, seems questionable, goals being rather abstract things). And "tenacious British mountaineers" does sound a bit rah-rah, even though it's certainly true. Rivertorch (talk) 04:21, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
I agree that "goals" can be speculative and the word "tenacious" is somewhat WP:PEACOCK/puffery sounding. Might be worth tweaking it a little to focus on the actual historical event rather than speculation of "man's hope" to be first to the top, as it were, and less rah-rah, as you say. No doubt that pioneers are tenacious and have balls of steel, but no need to go overboard. Ma®©usBritish{chat} 04:42, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
I've made the change. And let me just say: as someone who once was obsessed with Everest history and who still suffers from mild Anglophilic tendencies, it wasn't painless. :( Rivertorch (talk) 16:11, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Haha, bless.. nevermind, at least it's more neutrally worded now. You should try being an Anglophile and a Bonapartist, like me.. it'd make your head spin! :D Ma®©usBritish{chat} 16:25, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
My goodness. If you'd been around in 1815, would you have cheered or mourned? Rivertorch (talk) 19:31, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Still, I think there is plenty of fact, for example within wikipedia articles about history of mountaineering, that show mountaineering and conquering summits was generally done by rich people from remote and too flat regions of the world, when rhw locals were living in the valleys and were spending hundreds or thousands of years without imagining one second that their summits could be climbed, or could be just mountains and not gods and goddesses. Not all summits conquerors were English, they were also French, Italian or German aristocrats sometimes, still, even if you take only the Alps where the only local climbers were the crystal workers, it's many times an Englishman spending holidays there, who made the first ascents etc. Same phenomenon when you see that 3/4 of the best French alpinists are not locals, rather they are from Paris region and they learned to climb at Fontainebleau and love the alpine region as holidays playground. Your latter wording is still better though..:-) Akseli9 (talk) 22:53, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Indeed, but I don't know the history of mountaineering and don't pretend to, which is why my initial answer to Liz focuses more on her argument in the context of who was "first" to conceive the idea of climbing Everest, rather that their nationality. I believe Liz was concerned that the article puts too much emphasis on the British being "first" to want to conquer Everest, and that there surely must have been local Tibetans who wanted to and tried in the centuries before Brits ever set eyes on the mountain. I don't doubt it.. you can't "find" a mountain that people having been living near for donkey's years and can see from miles away, but it's not recorded that Tibetans ever made plans, only that they worship it, so we really can't prove it. We have records of the the earliest known expeditions and surveys of the Himalayas, and given that they were British-led we can assume those Brits discussed the earliest known "goal" to reach the top, even if those earliest Brits did not succeed, even if other nations tried in the years between the 1st British expedition and the 9th.. but I agree that the rewording is better, making it clearer that they actually made the first physical attempts which is more notable than ambition alone. Ma®©usBritish{chat} 14:32, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

No sane person is going to attempt to climb a mountain like Everest unless they have a pretty good reason to do so, and until Mountaineering became a hobby, and then sport, few of the locals would have had any desire to go any nearer to the mountain than they had to. The British, who for all practical purposes originated the sport of mountaineering, climbed Everest for the simple reason they climbed so many other mountains, it was a challenge, it was in today's terms a 'fun' thing to do - at least in their eyes, and because it was there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.147.13 (talk) 10:19, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

No mention of Maurice Wilson?[edit]

Maurice_Wilson, see also Who climbed Everest first? HR Mitchell 18:25, 11 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moondancer (talkcontribs)

  • Probably deserves to be mentioned although any claim of him achieving the first ascent seems extremely doubtful given his inadequate mountaineering experience and attempting it solo. RedWolf (talk) 04:14, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

mistake as to Great Trigonometric Survey[edit]

Waugh measured it at 29,000 feet on the nose. But that would look like an estimate, so to make it "seem" exact he added 2 feet and said it was 29,002. 24.44.243.38 (talk) 01:32, 19 March 2014 (UTC) captcrisis

  • When I added the Naming section back in 2008, the 29,000 feet was mentioned and a note about the 2 feet being added on. Not sure why someone deleted as I thought it was useful information. I'll try and hunt down when it got deleted and see if the editor mentioned a reason. If not, I think I will add it back in unless someone else provides a reasonable objection here. Thanks for spotting it. RedWolf (talk) 04:27, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

2006: Controversy[edit]

I would like to Edit some information about that Controversy part , how can i edit it ? or is there anyone who can help me with it ? The edit will be about what hapened with Maxime Chaya during that time. Thank you in Advance. J.Hassoun (talk) 13:35, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

  • What information exactly would you like to add? Do you have a reliable source to backup the new information? As long as you cite the source of your new information, feel free to add it yourself although please be sure to phrase the information in your own words. If you list your source here and provide some ideas of what information you want to add, I or someone else could assist in adding it for you. Thanks for using the talk page to discuss new information. RedWolf (talk) 04:05, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
The information i want to add are the Information from Maxime Chaya personaly (the Lebanese adventurer who was there).Is it possible to write here what i want to add/change on that part so You can check it before i post it? J.Hassoun (talk) 17:55, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes. Propose your changes, include reliable sources, and other editors will be glad to look it over. Rivertorch (talk) 21:36, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
I will rewrite the "2006:Controversy" part so if its possible to let me know if i can Edit it.Thank You.

Much of this controversy was captured by the Discovery Channel while filming the television program Everest: Beyond the Limit. A crucial decision affecting the fate of Sharp is shown in the program, where an early returning climber, Lebanese adventurer Maxime Chaya is descending from the summit and radios to his base camp manager (Russell Brice) that he has found a frostbitten and unconscious climber in distress. Chaya is unable to identify Sharp, who had chosen to climb solo without any support and so did not identify himself to other climbers. The base camp manager assumes that Sharp is part of a group that has already calculated that they must abandon him, and informs his lone climber that there is no chance of him being able to help Sharp by himself. As Sharp's condition deteriorates through the day and other descending climbers pass him, his opportunities for rescue diminish: his legs and feet curl from frostbite, preventing him from walking; the later descending climbers are lower on oxygen and lack the strength to offer aid; time runs out for any Sherpas to return and rescue him. Most importantly, Sharp's decision to climb without support left him with no margin for recovery. As this debate raged, on 26 May, Australian climber Lincoln Hall was found alive, after being declared dead the day before. He was found by a party of four climbers (Dan Mazur, Andrew Brash, Myles Osborne and Jangbu Sherpa) who, giving up their own summit attempt, stayed with Hall and descended with him and a party of 11 Sherpas sent up to carry him down. Hall later fully recovered. Similar actions have been recorded since, including on 21 May 2007, when Canadian climber Meagan McGrath initiated the successful high-altitude rescue of Nepali Usha Bista. Recognizing her heroic rescue, Major Meagan McGrath was selected as a 2011 recipient of the Sir Edmund Hillary Foundation of Canada Humanitarian Award, which recognizes a Canadian who has personally or administratively contributed a significant service or act in the Himalayan Region of Nepal.[110]J.Hassoun (talk) 18:15, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

In my opinion, that's too detailed and too long for this article. I'm also unclear on the source. What does the "110" in brackets signify? Rivertorch (talk) 05:38, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Its not too long..the text does exist on the page thats why there is 110 and there is a few adds to the original text. J.Hassoun (talk) 17:16, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 April 2014[edit]

Sections #1996 disaster and #2014 avalanche need to be updated to reflect 2014 Mount Everest avalanche: 1996 is now has the second-most deaths (recommend adding the bolded word: During the 1996 season, 15 people died while climbing on Mount Everest, then the highest number of fatalities in a single year in the mountain's history.), and More than 12 climbers were killed in the avalanche. can be changed to 16 climbers were killed and 9 were injured in the avalanche. based on the avalanche article, with appropriate sourcing brought in from that article. The latter section should also be expanded to include new information, but that's beyond the scope of the edit request. Thanks, 206.117.89.4 (talk) 09:48, 24 April 2014 (UTC) (User:Ansh666)

Yes check.svg Done, at least with the most basic info. Both sections need additional work. The 2014 avalanche section could and likely will be expanded sooner or later. The main article on the avalanche is beginning to flesh out nicely. Thanks --RacerX11 Talk to meStalk me 10:08, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2014[edit]

Please change "Higher Himalayan Sequence about 20 to 24 million years ago" to "Higher Himalayan Sequence about 22 to 26 million years ago" Due to the new evidence added to the geologic time scale. EvolutionistGeo (talk) 18:55, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --ElHef (Meep?) 19:06, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Youngest to reach summit[edit]

"2010 – Youngest to reach the summit, by Jordan Romero (13-year-old)". But in May 2014 Malavath Poorna, also 13, has been reported as the youngest ever, e.g. [1]> Martinevans123 (talk) 15:02, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Tibetan "name"[edit]

I have no real bone in this fight, but it's certainly off-putting that the Tibetan transcription in the lead sentence doesn't match the transcription in the infobox and neither matches Wylie which is generally the default. Since WP:MOS-TIBET doesn't exist and WP:MOS-ZH doesn't touch this, we have to fall back on WP:PLACE. That says (in a nutshell) that in a situation like this, we can explain all three somewhere but we should just pick one as the default for general use within the article. Unless someone has some very strong arguments to make w/r/t why Tibetan pinyin is suddenly the go-to, the standard transcription is presently Chomolungma per ngram and Google Books. (For what it's worth, scholar does prefer the pinyin. I'm betting because of PRC-based research papers but might be wrong.) — LlywelynII 16:39, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Tibetan romanisation is a bit of a sticky wicket. The closest thing to an accepted standard is, as you say, the Wylie system. Even then, note that some scholars use a modified Wylie which harmonises it with IAST (thus, Everest's Tibetan name might be transcribed jo-mo-glaṅ-ma). More problematic, Wylie is a transliteration of written Tibetan which includes many letters that have since become silent or changed sounds. Most writers refrain from using Wylie in running text, especially when writing for a general audience. Instead, something closer to a phonetic transcription is used. Here, there is simply no standard that prevails. The only standard that even a fraction of English-language scholars have adopted is THL Simplified Phonetic Transcription. The THL system is a slightly simplified version of a phonetic system previously developed by Nicolas Tournadre; both are approximately the same as the Wylie transliteration with silent letters removed. Everest's name would be Jomolangma (or Jomo Langma, as the article currently says) in the THL system or Jhomolangma in the older Tournadre system. Tournadre's system, if you know a few basic rules, does a pretty good job of indicating how to pronounce the word in Standard Tibetan. Ideally, I'd like to see Wikipedia adopt a slightly enhanced version of Tournadre's system, but that's probably quixotic because I'm the only one who uses that.
Tibetan Pinyin spellings (such as Qomolangma) have gained a bit of currency for place names because they are used by the Chinese government on official maps that include romanisations. For the same reason, I believe they've been picked up by the UN for the maps they produce. However, a lot of people object to them because they are often quite unfamiliar in appearance and sometimes do a poor job of implying an approximately acceptable pronunciation.
My suggestion for Wikipedia has been to try to find familiar conventional spellings for article titles wherever possible, rather than imposing consistent use of any system. That's for article titles – it's not 100% obvious to me that the same logic applies when we're referring to it as an alternate name in an article (such as this one) with a different title. After all, when we give an article a title, we are basically saying, this is the English-language name for this thing. Shigatse is the English-language name for a town in Tibet. But, in the case of the Mount Everest, the English-language name is Mount Everest. We might wish to take a different approach to how we give readers a piece of information about what it is called in another language. In some contexts, the simplest approach might be simply to give an IPA transcription of the name.
I don't have strong feelings about this particular case. "Chomolungma" looks a little odd to me and is certainly not correct in any romanisation system, but apparently it's used in some sources outside of Wikipedia. It does a pretty decent job of implying how to pronounce the word (the third vowel would probably tend to be transcribed as /ɑ/, but it wouldn't surprise me if most speakers actually pronounce it more like /ʌ/). – Greg Pandatshang (talk) 00:33, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

WP:ENGVAR[edit]

This edit established the page's usage as British English. Kindly maintain it consistently, pending a new consensus. — LlywelynII 16:53, 1 August 2014 (UTC)