Talk:Eight-thousander

earlier comments

First ascents dates for K2 and Gasherbrum II do not match those given by:

http://www.adventurestats.com/tables/8000erbasics.htm

The current dates listed taken from other web sources.

RedWolf 09:11, Dec 6, 2003 (UTC)

First ascensionist of Gasherbrum I

Some web sites give Kaufman, some Kauffman. I couldn't find a definitive spelling. Gdr 15:28, 2004 Jul 7 (UTC)

It's Kauffman with double FF. Check http://www.billbuxton.com/climbing.html#kauffman for a review from a befriended mountaineering-historian, or https://www.worldsorts.com/Portals/0/%5Cimages%5Cbooks%5C9780898863734_large.jpg for an image of a classic that he wrote on the 1939 Wiessner K2 expedition. [And, I've checked my own shelves as I have several copies of this book] Qwrk (talk) 22:55, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

China vs Tibet?

This page seems to be inconsistent about the use of China or Tibet... any ideas how to resolve this? (who are you?)

It really should be Tibet. While Tibet is not officially a country but a (disputed?) region of China, no one that I ever talk to when referring to mountains straddling the Nepal/Tibet border use China as the location. RedWolf 05:28, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)

Agreed! I will change it. Ok?

Agreed. And as nobody disagreed since 2005, I now just did it. (Nov, 30, 2007)

WP:FLC

Another excellent list - I trust someone is thinking of nominating this on Wikipedia:Featured list candidates? All it needs are some references. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:24, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Death rates

I think the "death rates" are a bit misleading. You'd think it would be a climbers chance of dying while attempting the summit, but it appears to actually be the ratio of deaths to successful ascents. -- Scott e^iπ 10:33, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

The ratios given are a pretty standard way of measuring the death rate, although you are correct that one could (in principle) instead give the ratio of deaths to attempts. One problem is that the number of attempts is much harder to quantify (what counts?) and obtain (who keeps careful track?).

True. The info is useful but should probably by clarified. -- Scott e^iπ 05:33, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Seriously, that has got to be the dumbest, most useless statistic I have ever seen. If it is "standard" in the climbing world, then it should be changed there too. It means absolutely nothing. Number of deaths is interesting, but the death rate should be removed unless you can change it to deaths per attempt. This information should be relatively easy to get as climbs up these high mountains are carefully monitored by the governments of these countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.9.229.95 (talk) 23:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Pakistan/India

I reverted some recent edits changing locations to from Pakistan or Pakistan/China to India. These peaks are all under the control of Pakistan, and the claim by India is already included in the footnote. See e.g. the discussion at Talk:K2. -- Spireguy 02:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

wikipedia is not bound by the claims made by India

why dont you go and edit the title of Arunachal Pardesh to south Tibet

or Jammu and Kashmir to Indian Occupied Kashmir--Hussain (talk) 08:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Your rhetorical questions above indicate exactly why "Karakoram" has been adopted here, so as to try to keep this article relating to mountaineering from continuing to be an ongoing forum for political edit wars that should be limited to other articles in which politics is relevant (Pakistan, India, Karakoram). See "Karakoram/Pakistan" section below for previous discussions of this issue. I don't necessarily debate the political point, and I'd personally just as soon see references here to "China" changed to "Tibet", but these really are issues to be resolved elsewhere. Steveozone (talk) 02:17, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Here's Encyclopaedia Britannica on K2: "the world’s second highest peak (28,251 feet [8,611 metres]), second only to Mount Everest. K2 is located in the Karakoram Range and lies partly in the Uygur Autonomous Region of Xinjiang of China and partly in the Northern Areas, the portion of the disputed Kashmir region under the administration of Pakistan." In actuality, the portion controlled by China, the Trans Karakoram Tract was ceded by Pakistan to China in 1963, an act that was (and still is) not recognized by India. There were rumors then (and unabated since) that the tract was ceded under duress. China had just won the "India-China War" of 1962, and Pakistan was scared. I'm sure I can dig up plenty of sources for that. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 05:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

And here's the MSN Encarta Dictionary: "K2 [ kày t ] second highest mountain in the world. It is situated in the Karakorum Range in the western part of the Himalayan system on the border between China and the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir. Height: 8,611 m (28,251 ft)" Both obviously mention the dispute. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 05:35, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I actually agree with you, Fowler (and you, too, Fowler), I just don't see the relevance here in this particular article. There have unfortunately been numerous persistent long-term edit wars in a broad swath of articles, relating to political jurisdiction over specific mountains, which has in turn caused unnecessary instability in this and other "mountaineering" articles. The question as I see it is not reliability of sources, or NPOV, or creating an article with rich detail. The question should be whether it is helpful or informative to discuss these military/political disputes in an article about mountaineering, or whether it is better to work on fair and sourced explanations of those political disputes in other articles in which they are more relevant. I don't see how this political history is pertinent in an article that documents mountaineering expeditions, particularly where it is complex and not well-suited to summarizing in a word or two in a table. Steveozone (talk) 17:29, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Karakoram is no country to be location. Its funny all peaks lying in side Pakistan are labelled as Karakoram, while the others are labelled by respective countries. What does this suppose to mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.136.250.4 (talk) 04:00, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

It is irrelevant to this article that how Pakistan/china got hold of the territory where K2 is located, and why india claim that territory to be its, what is relevant is that you need a Pakistani/Chinese passport to climb on k2, dont tell me last time you climbed it you had a "Karakorum" passport !

And obviously i dont need sources to prove that New Delhi is located in India ! or that k2 is located in Pak-China border. See Google earth for more info. الله أكبرMohammad Adil 19:24, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

well we either have locations of all the mountains on the list to their respective ranges or all need to mention the countries they are in .......If any body needs to go to k2 for example can any of the karakoram pushers please guide me where to get the karakorum visa from. Reverting the edits....111.68.96.98 (talk) 06:16, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Vladislav Terzyul

In this article it is written: he succeeded in climbing all fourteen eight-thousanders in the world so why he is not listed in section Climbers who have reached the summit of all eight-thousanders in Eight-thousander ? More, Italian Wiki has 15 people, who have reached the summit of all eight-thousanders. Who is right ? pjahr 06:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

It appears unclear but Everestnews.com has him succeeding on 13 eight-thousanders and that's already counting Makalu where he died. Looks to me like some of these websites have adjusted info to make it look like he did all 14. That's one thing we have to be careful about in this article, some of these climbers have come pretty close (within feet) of summits and even though they have not officially summited them they will still claim to have done so. JRWalko 02:41, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

The information on Everestnews.com is clearly out of date. And they actually write "Vladislav Terzyul (maybe 14!) more later". More recent information here http://www.terzyul.info/ and here http://www.terzyul.info/8000_e.htm. This information is easy to trace and it seems to coincide with given here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladislav_Terzyul - which also claims that Vladislav did all 14. Therefore if there are no objections - I propose to add Vladislav Terzyul to the list.

British/English?

Why is George Band's nationality given as British, but Joe Brown's and Alan Hinkes' as English? They should all be listed as British - even if any of them have strong personal views on the subject, England is not an independent country while the UK is. 86.132.139.19 01:53, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I put those flags in because the article on one says he was an "English" mountaineer while the article on the other says he was a "British" mountaineer. I just figured the people who watch over their articles were better at determining what they're national identity was.JRWalko 03:01, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Statistics

Visit this page for more and exact stats. You are allowed to take some of them for wikipedia. Questions? This is my german page for discussions (you can write in english, I hope I can understand most of it ;-)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.228.65.231 (talk) 19:56, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

When were the numbers on this page last updated? The number of ascents (at least of Everest) does not match the source at 8000ers.com, the number of ascents and deaths should have a "as of" date associated with them. Everest is at over 4000 ascents now. W. Mazur (talk) 06:36, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Tibet?

I'm sorry, but Tibet is not a country, whit all the respect that i have for de Dalai Lama and all. Tibet is now a region of China and the information must be changed. Some one disagree? Rakela 21:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Peter Schoening

Listed as a first ascender of Gasherbrum I, but with no link to article about him. The name should be changed to "Pete Schoening" and linked to the article about him. He is very well known for "The Belay" and the story is related in the Pete Schoening page.69.158.157.227 (talk) 00:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

oops

Sorry for all the pointless edits. I was trying to remove vandalism by 58.68.35.22 and I screwed it up. I'm new at this. I think it's back exactly how it was, though.Zeugmazwang (talk) 01:24, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Wielicki: solo climb??

The Jean-Christophe LaFaille-article says:

In December 2004 he made a solo ascent of Shisha Pangma. It was intended to be the first winter ascent of the mountain, and the first winter solo of any 8000m peak, (...)

How then can Wielicki have made a solo climb onto Lhotse in the winter of 1988? Or was he the only one (of several) to reach the summit? Or else, who were the other climbers with him? --Ibn Battuta (talk) 06:42, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

He was the only one of several climbers to reach the summit; it was not a true solo climb. See the AAJ article. -- Spireguy (talk) 16:42, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Prominence

I compiled a list by prominence of the 14 mountains. It seems interesting, particularly in indicating that Lhotse is the only non-Ultra among them.

Peak	Prominence
Mount Everest	8,848 m
Nanga Parbat	4,608 m
K2	4,017 m
Kangchenjunga	3,922 m
Dhaulagiri	3,357 m
Manaslu	3,092 m
Annapurna	2,984 m
Shishapangma	2,897 m
Makalu	2,386 m
Cho Oyu	2,340 m
Gasherbrum I	2,155 m
Broad Peak	1,701 m
Gasherbrum II	1,523 m
Lhotse	610 m

I don't know if it merits adding to the article though (or adding a separate column to the main sortable table). --David Edgar (talk) 16:09, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

First ascent sorting

If you choose to sort the list by First Ascent date, you get July, then June, then May, because that's how they are alphabetically. This is a really daft sort. I don't want to unilaterally add dates (most likely) in the iso format, yyyy-mm-dd so the column sorts on year but it's currently very difficult to see which were climbed first and which last. As it is, it reads like Nanga Parbat (July 3rd 1953) was first and Cho Oyu last (October 19th 1954), which isn't true for either of them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.18.225 (talk) 19:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Adjusted to the best of my ability. Thincat (talk) 10:05, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

"First recorded ascent"?

I would prefer to leave "first ascent" instead of "first recorded ascent" for the Annapurna climb. This has been discussed before elsewhere, where I think the consensus was to leave it as "first ascent" for highly technical peaks like Annapurna. I've never seen a source leave open the possibility that Annapurna was climbed before 1950. -- Spireguy (talk) 01:15, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Ralf Dujmovits (GER)

Reported to have summited Lhotse May 20, 2009 [1] which would be his 14th, completing the list. I've not edited the page as yet, but posting here pending additional confirmation. Steveozone (talk) 17:06, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Karakoram/Pakistan

Regarding recent changes to K2, Broad Peak, and Gasherbrum, the loss of the term "Karakoram" in the table has, I believe, made the table less informative. The Karakoram is on the border between Pakistan and China, as noted in the reference cited; however, there have been ascents from the Chinese side. Indeed, K2 apparently has no native name from the Pakistan side; the well-known local name "Choguri" was given to it by locals on the China side of the present national border. K2 has been climbed from China, since 1982. See [2]. Therefore, in light of the above, it is not entirely accurate to locate these peaks in Pakistan, and I would suggest that the more informative way to describe them is to locate them in "the Karakoram" and then further discuss the Karakoram here or elsewhere to provide national references, as appropriate. Steveozone (talk) 06:10, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I will revert the changes. Viewfinder (talk) 08:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Putting "India" into the infobox based on asserted facts relating to border disputes and nationalist agendas from one or more peoples in the region also distracts from the topic here, which is climbers and mountaineering, and not the local politics. Even acknowledging that many mountaineers who visit these peaks do care about the local politics, nevertheless that discussion is much better held in the articles concerning specific mountains or locations, than by changing labels in the infobox here.

As I believe that the identification of countries or geographic names in this article serves only to enable readers to understand the geographic location of the peaks mentioned, I would propose that the wikified term "Karakoram" be used for those peaks located there, and those who feel the need to clarify who governs or should govern there can edit that article, which will provide further information to readers who are looking for that information. Steveozone (talk) 02:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Disagree. The locations should be changed to Pakistan or China/Pakistan depending on the peek so all locations are geopolitical entities. By stating the location as a mountain range, the other peeks should also be changed to whichever mountain range they are located in. Wikipedia, being an encyclopedia, is not a mountaineering guide book, therefore the location should be by country or another column should be added to indicate the Mountain range for all peeks. Additionally, the Karokoram region is located in specific countries and is not an independent nation as the article suggests. Furthermore, the argument that Pakistanis have no native name for K2 does not mean that K2 is not located in Pakistan as Steveozone suggests. Therefore I suggest reverting Karokoram back to Pakistan, or Pakistan/China if that mountain is accessible from both sides. Dominating international view is that these peeks are located in Pakistan and Pakistan has governance over them. The fact that the Pakistani military is actively involved in rescuing mountaineers trapped in these ranges supports my argument. By stating the location by country and not a mix of countries plus mountain ranges will add uniformity to this article and make it clear to non-expert readers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Isfet (talk • contribs) 22:54, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Disagree.I believe that as K2 is shared by Pakistan as well as china so the location name should be Pakistan/China and not the mountain range in which the mountain exists. If its location has to be catagorized as per the mountain range it is located in then all other peaks should be catagorized in the same manner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Corrector123 (talk • contribs) 09:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Why inventing new names whenthe region already have a name. Karakorum was a capital of early mongols, did you know that ? and it is located in mongolia. Simply putting Pakistan/China is a simplest solution. As a matter of fact, you need a pakistani/chines passport to climb k2. Then there is no point to give undue weightage to apparently balance the view in the light of india's disputed claims. In fact i see no point in even furthering this discussion its point less to discuss whether to give it a wikified name "Karakorum". Going this way i think we will have to give Gaza, Jerusalem and Cyprus a new wikified name !

الله أكبرMohammad Adil 19:33, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Pakistan/China is not neutral because India's claim is not rejected by the international community. Karakoram is simpler, more neutral and appropriate term for this geographical article. The de facto position in explained in the footnote. Incidentally, the similar nature of the edit summaries at [3], [4] and [5], apparently by three different editors, suggests that these editors are not independent of each other and probably in breach of WP:SOCK and/or WP:MEAT. Viewfinder (talk) 20:57, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

The thing is that it's not really a geographical article. True, Wikipedia is not a mountaineering guide, but this article is about climbing, and therefore the geopolitics are essentially irrelevant. "China/Pakistan" would be just fine, but there's a history on this and other articles of endless revisions debating whether it's Pakistan, or occupied India; the situation with Tibet/China in climbing articles is similar, and again has little to do with climbing. It's counterproductive to keep endlessly fiddling with the one or two-word national labels in a table here, where there's no room to properly explain these political issues, and it's better and more informative to explain those issues in greater detail in the geographical articles. Steveozone (talk) 04:50, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, "climbing" is more accurate that "geographical", but the principle is the same. Edit warring by nationalist POV pushers at List of highest mountains because such a problem that the country column was removed. "Karakoram" was an attempt that I made a while ago to provide an accurate, neutral and simple location. The geo-political situation is footnoted, including the fact that most climbing is from Pakistan. For the most part, Karakoram has stuck, but sadly, whatever we use, there will always be some discontented nationalists. Viewfinder (talk) 16:42, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

I dont think there is a need of endless debates over this topic, the solution is quite simple, just mention the geographical location which is true in current situation, i.e Who holds tibet now ? china ! so just mention it .. who holds northern Kashmir now a days ? Pakistan ! so just mention it.... and if K2 is situated on the border of tibet and kashmir then just mention Pakistan/China. The geographical location is true under current circumstances, so no need to invent new terms like Karakorum etc etc .. mentioning location of k2 as pakistan/china will not harm the indian claim to northern kashmir, infact what i believe is that due to few biased (nationalist) editors who are just trying to satisfy their nationalist claims, this article which is related to mountains, is suffering. If K2 is in pakistan/china border region and you need a pakistani/chines passport to climb it, then why the hell any one is trying to invent so called neutral terms ? Under such obvious clues i would definitely doubt the intentions of the editor and i will question his neutrality.

الله أكبرMohammad Adil 20:02, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Please do not question my neutrality or good faith in this discussion, and please leave "Karakoram", which has been stable for several months, unless or until there is consensus in favour of changing it. Viewfinder (talk) 20:41, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

There is nothing "new" about the term Karakoram, it the name of a well known mountain range in an article about climbing. The geo-political situation is footnoted. Viewfinder (talk) 20:50, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. The mountaineering literature (the sources we use for encyclopedia articles) typically do not get into detail about the then-current geopolitical situation at the location of notable climbing achievements. In that context, Karakoram is well-established, and no one is "inventing" anything -- the name of the range, or the glacier (Himalaya, Karakoram, Baltoro, etc.) helps the reader understand the general location, and those readers interested in the politics in the area can move on to an article that addresses geopolitics. It's not a matter of neutrality; it's a matter of explaining facts in an appropriate and relevant article, and limiting the counterproductive nationalism debate to those articles that are on that topic (rather than mountain climbing). Steveozone (talk) 21:26, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

I guess by now I'm not the only one who's getting just a little bit more than slightly annoyed about these continued chauvinistic edits. What's the point you're trying to get across, Mohammad adil, other than inserting your nationalistic pride into neat and completely harmless articles like these? There's no need trolling us. Qwrk (talk) 21:59, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

If location of K2 is Karakorum then the location of Everest should be Himalayas ! agreed ?

الله أكبرMohammad Adil 13:59, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

It looks odd to see some of the mountain's locations mentioned with their ranges and others by the countries .....Uniformity should prevail. 111.68.96.98 (talk) 07:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

It has been changed to all countries by I think an anon, and I think a couple things need to be said. Yes to above post. We have got to consider uniformity within a page. It really looks amaturish to have countries and range names mixed together for the locations. I really don't understand why so many are insistent on using countries anyway. Im hesitant to even mention this, but there is certain other list that doesn't even bother to state the country at all, and instead, it has the specific range for the location. Someone will probably revert the latest edit, but please consider how important aesthetics are to these articles. We all do so much to make these articles look good and pleasing to the eye, and pleasing to read. We do this more than most of us realize. But we do it. Yet in this article, for some reason, for way too long, we have endured a page that just looked bad. It needs to be one way or another. All countries or all ranges, please. Thank you. Racerx11 (talk) 12:12, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

At least this way is consistent, if they are all to be changed it should probably be discussed here. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:47, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, I am fine with the way it is now. Just sayin I would support anyone who wants to go to all range names. But yes, it should be discussed first. Racerx11 (talk) 17:07, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I'd be OK with that, you've still got the flags for the countries too. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:24, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Hans Kammerlander

I'ved changed Hans Kammerlander's ranking from having climbed 12 of the 14 8000'ers to having climbed 13 of the 14 8000'ers. Hans Kammerlander and Reinhold Messner climbed together as partners at the time of Reinhold's 14th 8000'er, and which was the 13th 8000'ers for Hans. Also, Hans is not Italian nor does he live in Italy, instead he is German and still lives in Germany. He actually mentions both these correct facts (having climbed 13 out of the 14 8000'ers, and being born in and still living in Germany) in his autobiography. And it is also mentioned on his personal website.

Not surprising that he himself would so claim; however, according to other sources, there's some controversy over whether he reached the true summit on Shishapangma - www.everestnews.com has some articles on this. Steveozone (talk) 19:06, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Whatever you may think, Ahornach is most definitely located on Italian soil. The region of Trentino was part of Austria-Hungary (and its predecessor, the Austrian Empire) from 1815 until its annexation by Italy in 1919. It might be the only German-speaking part of Italy, it still is Italy.Qwrk (talk) 20:26, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Kammerlander climbed the central-peak of Shishapangma, has 12 8000ers in total, lives in Italy and is sometimes not well-informed. Eberhard Jurgalski of 8000ers.com asked him more than one year ago which route he took and which peak of Shisha he climbed. Then Jurgalski send photos with the summits to Kammerlander, but he never answered. Kammerlander seems not to be interested in solving this problem and this is why all the common climbing-databases have him with 12 8000ers. --PietJay (talk) 20:15, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I think we're on the same page, PJ. Not sure why the first paragraph above written by somebody else (who will remain anon 86.84.135.157) lost its signature. To be clear, I agree that Kammerlander's climb on Shishapangma is the controversial one, and I doubt he reached the summit. I agree, without it he still has 12, and I don't care much whether he is well-informed or claims to be Italian or German, or whether (as I was responding to above) his website asserts that he climbed 13 (I'm thinking of making my own website claiming "all 15", a la Borat. ;-)) Steveozone (talk) 04:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

You might even consider extending that list to include all 22 main peaks above 8000 meters. Kangchenjunga has 4 summits above that mark that are all equally interesting to have a go at.Qwrk (talk) 12:41, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Nanga Parbat 2009

Go Mi-Sun (KOR) reportedly completed her 11th summit, (a single-season triple in the 8000+ Himalayans, and 4x8000+ for the year, aggressively seeking to complete all 14) but has apparently fallen and died on descent. Looking for a source, but she reportedly had confirmed plans to complete Gasherbrum I and II and Annapurna (the remaining 8000+s) within the year.

Oh Eun-Sun (KOR) also summitted, her 12th.

Per reports from Joao Garcia, who also summitted (his 13th).

[[6]][[7]]

I haven't updated yet, but will in a few days, if there are enough reports. Steveozone (talk) 04:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

K2

As of the 1st August 2008, 76 people have died climbing K2 or the Savage Mountain as it is known. This includes the 11 that were killed a couple of days before, when during an avalanche ice took out a section of the fixed ropes stranding 15 climbers, 4 were rescued, but the other 11 were not found.

The total number of people who have climbed K2 stands at 305 as of 1st August 2008, so the ratio of death to success stands at 1 in 4, (Everest is 1 in 10), only Annapurna has a higher death rate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JanJak (talk • contribs) 14:16, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Climber Statistics

Andrew Lock used O2 on Everest as reported in the Explorersweb page (http://explorersweb.com/stats/news.php?id=18964) : "Ralf Dujmovits and Andrew Lock both used oxygen albeit only on Everest. Planning to repeat Everest next year without oxygen, "I need to finish 8,000 metre climbing soon because I've been so lucky to survive this long," Lock said. "That's why I say, 'this one more climb' - then it's time to hang up the boots." "

Andrew do reconise it in his website (http://www.andrew-lock.com/summit-8000.shtml) where it is written: "But this is not the end of Andrew’s Summit 8000 project. Andrew has climbed all the 8000 metre peaks without auxiliary oxygen. Except Mt Everest. So, in April/May 2010, Andrew will return to Mt Everest to scale it for an historic, third time but on this expedition without oxygen. And he will climb solo and attempt to traverse the peak from one side to the other. "

So the verified climbers'list in the article should only show 9 climbers who have summited the 14 8000ers w/o O2 User:Mabaf 14:06, 08 March 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Mabaf, 14 April 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} In the list of "Verified climbers who have reached the summit of all 14 eight-thousanders" delete the number 10 in the second column because Andrew Lock did use O2 when he climbed the Everest. A reliable source of this is Andrew himself in his website:

(http://www.andrew-lock.com/summit-8000.shtml) where it is written: "But this is not the end of Andrew’s Summit 8000 project. Andrew has climbed all the 8000 metre peaks without auxiliary oxygen. Except Mt Everest. So, in April/May 2010, Andrew will return to Mt Everest to scale it for an historic, third time but on this expedition without oxygen. And he will climb solo and attempt to traverse the peak from one side to the other. "

Mabaf (talk) 15:07, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Done /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 23:33, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

In the list of "Verified climbers who have reached the summit of all 14 eight-thousanders" second column (O2) Add number 10 as João Garcia - its confirmed he finnished all 14 withouth artificial O2. Futher info quite avalable on the usual sites. Plus correct his nationality its typed Portuguese and not Portugese.

João Garcia

Please correct climber nationality misspell (Portuguese instead of Portugese).
Please add climber as the 10th climber to finish all 14 8000's without artificial O2.
CONFIRMED - [8]

Corrected. Thanks for the hint.Qwrk (talk) 17:48, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Edurne Pasaban

Pasaban was the first woman who climb all the eight-thounders. Miss Oh lied about one of her summits. http://www.eitb.com/sports/en/detail/493194/pasaban-oh-fiasco-rumbles/ Then South Corea has 3 climbers and not 4, like Spain or Poland —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuchinzk (talk • contribs) 13:21, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Done Qwrk (talk) 15:11, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Anatoli Boukreev

Climbers and 8000m peaks (Order accomplished, as of August 29, 2010)

Boukreev 10 peaks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.99.45.74 (talk) 10:16, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Boukreev is on 9. Shishapangma North Summit is not counted as an official 8000m summit.

Boukreev jest na 9. Shishapangma North szczytu nie jest liczona jako oficjalny szczyt 8000m.

Qwrk (talk) 05:28, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Ryszard Pawłowski

Ryszard Pawłowski He has summited 10 of the fourteen 8000 metre peaks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.99.45.74 (talk) 12:55, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Death rate since 1990

Hello. Could someone write a line or two in the article explaining the significance of the year 1990 in parsing the death rates? Was there an accumulation of advances in technique or equipment that made climbing safer from roughly 1990 onward? Were safer routes made available or discovered?Wikimedes (talk) 21:29, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Also, if I read the note at the bottom of the table correctly, a more accurate heading for the last column would be "death rate 1990-2003". If anyone agrees, let me know and I'll change it.Wikimedes (talk) 21:29, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I can maybe give some explanation. Before 1990 the climbers on these peaks were comprised mostly of hard-core passionate mountaineers, many of whom where interested in setting "firsts". Such as: first to climb all 8000ers; first to climb peak x without O2; first to climb mountain y in winter; first to climb new route etc. These were inherently dangerous endeavours and cost many lives, but eventually most of these firsts were achieved and then in the 90's there emerged the guided ascents and along with it, a new breed of climber. The more novice climber, who simply wanted to get to the top of a given mountain by whatever meathod, usually taking the easiest route possible under the most ideal conditions. These guided ascents were designed to get more and more of these less-skilled climbers to the top by providing: expert knowledge and guidance, pre-staging O2 and other supplies; pre-fixing ropes in advance and other intense Sherpa support. As a result of this trend, the total number of successful ascents increased, thereby statistically lowering the overall death rate even in years when significantly large numbers of climbers did die (the death rate is calculated as a ratio of deaths to successful ascents). See last paragraph of this section of 1996 Mount Everest disaster for an extreme example of this.

Why 1990 exactly? My guess, just a round numbered year which happens to correspond to this changing of trends. Hope this at least partially answers your first question. --Racerx11 (talk) 22:41, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Would it be accurate to say "Since about 1990, guided ascents have brought many climbers to the summits by the safest means possible, greatly reducing the death rate."?Wikimedes (talk) 00:06, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah that sounds good. I was trying to think of a succinct way of saying what I wrote.

The only thing I'd change is "safest means possible". It might be better to say "Since about 1990, guided ascents have brought many climbers to the summits by the safer means, greatly reducing the death rates."--Racerx11 (talk) 00:12, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Please note that this is just my opinion and some sources that support what I say will also address the debate about whether guiding inexperienced climbers to top of major summits is really a good idea at all. Many believe these methods are even more likely to get someone in trouble. But like I said, its mostly my opinion why the rates have dropped. Racerx11 (talk) 00:24, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I was happy for the better understanding provided by the extra detail in your explanation; just trying to pair it down to table annotation size. Yeah, "safest means possible" is probably overstating it a bit.Wikimedes (talk) 07:45, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit proposal by Qwrk, for those administrators that appear to be in the know.........

Since when does this page have Full protection? Well, why should I care, I can leave the following job to be done by you guys and gals.

Mingma Sherpa from Nepal summited Kangchenjunga thus completing the 14 8000m summits.

Be so kind and apply your exquisite and unique craft and skills to add the man to the list, will'ya? TIA, Qwrk (talk) 20:09, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Done Qwrk (talk) 06:53, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

I think it was just a mistake due to me misunderstanding what the IP was doing. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:38, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

No worries, Eraserhead1, I only found out after posting that request that in fact it was I who requested page protection. Not realising I was about to shut the door behind me with it...... Qwrk (talk) 22:45, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Country with the highest number of climbers that have climbed all 14 8000ers

Why isn't Italy also at 4 climbers with SK ? Messner, Martini, Mondinelli,Blanc Thankx Wentu (talk) 13:46, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Good question. Perhaps it was simply overlooked in the recent updates. I went ahead and changed it and I also rephrased the statement so it does not read so much as if it is a competition of some sorts between countries.--Racerx11 (talk) 14:32, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Naming convention for South-Korean climbers.

G'day all,

I have an issue with which I could use some help, please.

Whilst doing corrections for a well known climbing magazine the issue was raised on what type of naming convention to use for South-Korean mountaineers. Wikipedia has a style in place which is the opposite of what's in use in mountaineering literature.

- The Himalayan Database [Liz Hawley] is using the "given name - surname" style of writing for the Koreans like it does with all other nationalities.
- Eberhard Jurgalski [8000ers.com] has the same method.
- Richard Sale; likewise.

A specialist on Korean writing gave us a little lecture about these names, so I'd like to propose changing these names to make them consistent and in line with the western style of notation.
Go Mi-Sun (or Go Mi-Yeong?) - would be written as; Mi-Young Go
Kim Jae-Soo - would be written as; Jae-Soo Kim
Oh Eun-Sun - would be written as; Eun-Sun Oh etc.

Qwrk (talk) 07:34, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Bian Ba Zha Xi, Ci Ren Duo Ji, and Luo Ze

In the past week or so, these three names have been added without citation to the list of people who have climbed all fourteen 8000ers. They have been removed, re-added, and removed again today. A Bing search yields no evidence that any of these three have summitted the 8000ers. Bian Ba Zha Xi appears to have climbed Gasherbrun I,[9], but I can't find any evidence that the other two are even mountaineers. The fact that they are supposed to have completed the task in 2006, but are only being mentioned now, is also suspicious. I hope that before adding the names to the list again, a reference can be found to support their inclusion. Does anyone have any information regarding this?--Wikimedes (talk) 06:21, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Cuiyingjie is just poking with us, messing up that neatly designed table, by inserting unsubstantiated claims and false data. Please just check with Eberhard at 8000er.com for the PDF of all climbers who completed the Crown of the Himalaya; (http://www.8000ers.com/cms/en/download.html?func=startdown&id=155) updated till May 26, 2012. I'm getting a bit fed up with this guy, to be honest. Qwrk (talk) 06:34, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

I think this may shed some light on who these people are/where the names come from: [10]. It's a discussion of an effort to get a team, apparently including the names referenced, to all 14 peaks, but it doesn't appear to support the assertions made here about these people, though. Steveozone (talk) 00:50, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Reverts by User:Globetrotter1918 and his inability to communicate / have a sensible discussion.

G'day User:Globetrotter1918, and the rest of the contributors to this page,

To be honest, I'm getting a bit fed up with you and your reverts. I have been specialising on the history of K2 for well over 20 years and now you come storming as a noob who doesn't even have the courtesy to reply to comments or subjects that we better discuss between contributors on wikipedia. I am going to revert your edit AGAIN and would like you to respect the rules in place her, or I'm going to be forced to notify an Administrator.

Jurgalski IS the official channel for the ascents of the Pakistani 8000m peaks! The Himalayan Database does ONLY cover the mountains of Nepal! / Jurgalski jest oficjalnym kanałem do wspinaczki na szczyty Pakistanu 8000m! Himalayan Database ma obejmować wyłącznie górach Nepalu!

Qwrk (talk) 14:57, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

@Qwrk: and @Globetrotter1918: Yep, it looks good to me. The claim is well sourced and documented by the authoritative source on the subject. I don't what user Globetrotter's beef is with it because, as you have pointed out, it appears he is unwilling or unable to discuss the matter. --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 15:28, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

• Where's the source you see Egocheaga ?

It's not Jurgalski issue licenses to earn peaks in Pakistan, but the Pakistani government. It does not issue certificates confirming Jurgalski ascents, only the government of Pakistan. And this: http://k2bottleneck.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/jorge-egocheaga-stopped-12m-from-k2-summit/

Thank you for your highly appreciated input. Mille grazie, Qwrk (talk) 15:32, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

@Qwrk: Well I have to back peddle a little. I had assumed Jorge Egocheaga was on the 8000ers list when I saw the citation. Sorry I was/am in the middle of large revision at another unrelated article. I guess that's the problem. Do you not yet have a source stating explicitly he has climbed K2? --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 16:15, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

User:Globetrotter1918, thank you for your unsubstantiated claims and edits. It has certainly made it easier for me to make up my mind about the effort that I put into wikipedia. I have just announced my

Retired

This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.

and will not consider coming back, no matter what. Thank you for this valuable insight. And on top of that, I'd still like to add that you are one simple-minded nutter. GFY. Qwrk (talk) 16:21, 3 August 2014 (UTC)