Talk:Extreme points of Europe

Greenland?

Since when is Greenland not part of Europe?

Since forever, really. When they left the EU it broke the main link with Europe. Warofdreams talk 01:04, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

See Greenland, where it is said that Greenland is "geographically and ethnically an Arctic island [...] associated with the continent of North America", though "politically and historically closely tied to Europe". JBarreto 18:24, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

But I don't know if it is true. I would rather admit that Greenland is Arctic, period. What does it mean "associated"? JBarreto 18:47, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

"Associated" means that continents are an arbitrary concept anyway, keeping that in mind Greenland is conventionally viewed as part of North America. The Arctic is not viewed as a continent by any common convention. Anorak2 12:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Greenland was always and still is geographically part of North America irrespective of its affiliations and historical ties with Denmark. Just as there are records of Vikings being born in North America hundreds of years before Columbus officially discovered the place, there are myths that Greenland is not American. It is even joined to Canada in winter by ice (or was until recently when the Northwest Passage suddenly became navigable during winter!). Reference The Vikings Came to America at infohub.com Garigolf 18:26 BST, 7 October 2007 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 17:27, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

When Greenland was discovered, bcz Denmark owns Greenland and Denmark is a part of Europe 2600:1700:1EAC:A0B0:CD4F:6BA2:7B01:8CFD (talk) 01:04, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Europe's Westernmost Point

What about a point on the Falkland Islands? They're British. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.243.148.193 (talk) 09:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Should not the Azores be mentioned as a candidate for Europe's Westernmost Point. See for instance this Google search result: [1]

Depends on the definition of Europe. That's why the footnotes are there to accomodate all common definitions. The only definition that is not acceptable (and thus provoked an edit revert) is to include in Europe some territories of the EU that are uncontestedly in other continents, like French Guyana or some Indic Ocean French Territories. --maf 23:58, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

If, as the Continent article states, "islands are usually considered to belong geographically to the continent they are closest to," then the Azores are certainly European (just like the Canary Islands are certainly African – I'm actually not quite sure about Madeira). I'm fairly certain that the Continent article is right about this being the accepted geographical definition, and I can't really see any case for the Azores belonging to any other continent, that is Africa or North America. Of course, part of the archipelago is on the North American plate, but I think tectonics is beside the point here (and then, Bjargtangar is certainly on the North American plate as well, so obviously we currently don't care about these things). I think there is no reason not to include the westernmost point of the Azores in the "Europe" subsection. -- Jao 00:19, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

The Azores are not a "point", they are an archipelago. The westernmost point of Europe is the Monchique Islet (31º 16' 24″ W), west of Flores. Of course Azores belong to Europe! -- Barreto 12:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC). And I mean it! Ze 13:36, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

The issue in question here is whether these Westernmost points in the Azores and Iceland are in Europe when in fact both of these places stradle the junction between the European and American plates, given that they are on the mid-Atlantic plate boundary. (Ultegra (talk) 11:27, 20 October 2008 (UTC))

Yes, geologically neither of these are on the European continental shelf. The westernmost dry land connected to the European continental shelf is likely Tearaght Island. This point of view should be represented in the article. --JWB (talk) 05:56, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Using the definition of continent above, Ireland is indisputably part of Europe and is further west than Portugal with Tearaght Island having a longitude 10º 39' 42″ W. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MerryweatherMI3635 (talk • contribs) 12:51, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, using the definition of the westernmost point of dry land on the European continental shelf, Ireland would be the westernmost point. 2001:6B0:B:609:9:0:0:AD (talk) 16:08, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Europe is not continental Europe. And there is no continental devide between eurasia, So nobody should talk about continental plates, unless you want to argue that whatever point is also the westernmost point of Asia. Most simply I would think mainland europe is continental Europe and that oceans and mountains separate continents. Tymes (talk) 11:11, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Remote islands

What I also would like is a clear definition of the "remote island" concept. How far from the mainland must an island be to be remote? Clearly, Yuzhny Island is counted as remote while Gavdos is not. What's up with that? -- Jao 00:19, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

If Ireland is not a "remote Island", I think Iceland fits well the case.JBarreto 01:34, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

There is no reason to exclude Iceland just because a lot of water lies in between. Jan Mayen Island, Bear Island(Bjørnøya), Hopen and the Azores are quite clearly part of the European mass - even if out in the ocean. Similarly, the European Russian Arctic Sea Islands should be included.

However, Bouvet Island(Bouvetøya), way down in the South Atlantic towards the S Pole can't be included just as "off Africa" and "off South America" Islands can't be included and so the Falkland Islands, Tristan da Cunha, Saint Helena and Ascension Island must be excluded as well as Portuguese and Spanish colonial possessions that may still exist. I would definitely not include the Canary Islands as they are Africa as are the Spanish African Coast islands and enclaves. However, Madeira and Porto Santo could just about qualify to be included.

For the south easternmost places in Europe, I belong to the school that acknowledges the European part of Kazachstan (but which I classify for my website as Asia due to absence of connections with Europe). We also consider the trans-continental countries of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia to be European (main argument being their cultural and commercial connections with Europe rather than Asia). An enclave of Azerbaijan (Naxcivan) is, however, often regarded as fully in Asia (but classed with the mother country generally). Taking the Aras River rather than the Kura River makes sense and, whilst Turkey is trans-continental with the largest part in Asia, it is often also included with Europe when it comes to travel and trade. Refer to Worldatlas.com and Wikipedia.com for maps and further confirmation.

Gari 17:40 BST, 7 October 2007

Iceland and the Azores are on the mid Atlantic ridge. From a mere geographic point of view they could be counted as part of Europe, America or neither with equal justification. They are usually considered part of Europe for historical and cultural reasons only, as they've been settled by European nations before what is conventionally regarded as "discovery of America" and are thus considered part of the "old country". But they would still be considered "remote" as they're not on the continental shelf or anywhere close.

Mainland possessions on different continents or island in remote seas are never considered part of Europe in any definition, even if they're sovereign territory of some European nation, so the point is moot. Anorak2 (talk) 08:09, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Central point

Can anyone tell me how it was calculated that the island of Saaremaa host the central point of Europe? Was it simply by taking the four extreme points and seeing where they cross? --Gozols 09:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it seems to be the central point of the (non-Euclidean) rectangle with the given west, north, east and south boundaries, which differs from the crossing-line method in that the west-to-east location of the northern and southern extreme points (and vice versa) do not matter. This is arguably a reasonable definition of "central point", although it might be a bit more interesting to know where the European centroid lies. I'm sure someone has attempted to compute that? -- Jao 21:27, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

The various points in the article could use (full) coordinates. -- User:Docu

Details

Cape Zhelaniya certainly is not the easternmost cape of Novaya Zemlya. Cape Flissingskiy lies further east, and the coordinates of cape Zhelaniya were not correct. I am not able to give the coordinates of Cape Flissingski with the accuracy of arcseconds.

I've rounded the accuracy of the coordinates given in later section to full arcseconds. Somebody put is as exact as 0.000, but it means accuracy of 0.03 m. Such an accuracy is very doubtful unless a reliable reference is added. The coordinates of the watershed on Ural mountains with the accuracy of the order of 1 cm are not possible, as well as of the centre of Europe.89.77.103.56 (talk) 08:42, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Easternmost point

Why is the easternmost point "excluding remote islands" different from the easternmost point of "mainland Europe"? That would be the case only if the former was on an inshore island which, from the map, does not seem to be the case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.47.251 (talk) 19:09, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Why can't we vote on the correct defintion between the three definitions given in the article:

1. 1. Easternmost point — In Russia, an unnamed 535 metre peak at 68° 18′ 50″ E on the far northern Ural Mountains watershed divide.
   2. Easternmost point — easternmost end of the Komi Republic, Russia (66° 11′ 57″ E) Assuming the watershed of the Ural Mountains as Europe's eastern border.
   3. However, according to the definition accepted in Russia and in many other European countries the easternmost point of Europe is the mouth of Bajdarata river, 68° 11′ E

Please also read Geography of Europe, List of countries spanning more than one continent and Borders of the continents. --BIL (talk) 18:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

According to by atlas and Google maps, the eastern border of the Komi Republic seems to be the place. According to Borders of the continents the border ends at Kara at 69°6′N 64°43′E, so the easternmot point would be 67°44′N 66°15′E. In principle number 2. --BIL (talk) 19:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Close....but the political boundary for the Kara Rep. often veers off the standard definition of the Ural Mtn. watershed as the eastern bdy. of Europe. Any detailed map (i.e., Soviet General Staff map for sale at Omnimaps.com) or on Google Earth - Google Maps shows the Ural watershed's easternmost point to be as follows:

an unnamed 545 meter peak at 68° 18′ 37″ N 66° 37′ 05″ E on the far northern Ural Mountains watershed divide, 17 km northeast of an 875 meter peak named Gora Anoraga (in Geonames and on Google Earth)DLinth (talk) 18:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Image/text inconsistency

The text states that the most Westerly point of Europe (not just mainland) is in Ireland, yet the image shows it as being in Portugal. I've consulted an atlas, and the lines of longitude clearly show that Ireland indeed has the most westerly point.

92.28.60.190 (talk) 09:27, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

The fact that Ireland's westernmost point is more westerly than any point in mainland Europe is rather irrelevant, because Ireland is not part of the mainland. There are European islands even further west, so Ireland isn't a candidate for the westernmost island either. Sorry. Anorak2 (talk) 14:08, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Southernmost point?

On the map, it appears that Tarifa in Spain is in fact the southernmost point on mainland Europe, not a point in Greece. This is confirmed by the Wikipedia page on Tarifa and by consulting a road atlas of Europe.

129.234.82.236 (talk) 21:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC) Retyef

Europe as a continent includes islands as well.The Southern most point in GEOGRAPHICAL Europe's totality is the Island of Gavdos in Greece.If we were to exclude Islands from Europe then Sicily,The Belearics,Sardinia,Corcica,Thousand of Greek Islands,Ireland and Great Britain should not be considered Europe

Since when was Cyprus part of Europe. It lies EAST of the BOSPHORUS, the closest land mass is Turkey and it was when I went ot school part of Asia. Oh silly me it was when the Greek Cypriots conned the world in 2004, having been told that 1. They had to accept the Kofi Annan Plan BEFORE they could join the EU, but the EU being the EU bent the rules as usual, the Greek Cypriots voted against the Kofi Annan Plan, voted to join the EU and teh EU said OK we'll let you join anyway. Cyprus was not, is not and never will be part of Europe or Greece. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.244.61.13 (talk) 16:46, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Idiot. We Greek Cypriots are culturally European.

Mainland Europe midpoint has nonsensical definition

The mainland Europe geographical midpoint has nonsensical definition in the article (see Extreme points of Europe#Mainland Europe):

The geographical midpoint equidistant to these extreme points (if 66° 11′ 57″ E is used as easternmost point) is at 53°34′01.5″N 28°20′57.2″E...

There is no equdistant point from four or more arbitrary points (i.e. it has the same distance from every of the points) in a two-dimensional space.[2] I think that it was meant that the midpoint is equidistant from the two extreme latitude lines and equidistant from the two extreme longitude lines. Can please anyone confirm this so the article could be corrected? Probably I will compute result according to this hypothesis later to check. Thank you. --pabouk (talk) 11:20, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

First, sorry it has taken so long to respond to your request.

I have simply removed the entry. One problem is that it was calculated based upon an easternmost point which is not the easternmost point in the list above. While I could recalculate, that borders on wp:OR. The requester's point is well-taken, that the phrasing "equidistant to these extreme points" is nonsensical, and the proposed alternative is more sensible, but it is not obvious that the value proposed was calculated on that basis, or that reliable sources deem that approach as the best approach. I believe some experts use the theoretical balancing point of the entire shape, but I am not certain of that, not do I know the value that would result. The key point is that we ought to have some reliable sources discussing this. I see even the less controversial extreme points are devoid of references, so I will add the need to include those references.--S Philbrick(Talk) 12:58, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

request edit

I believe the westernmost point of Europe including islands is the Cliffs of Látrabjarg in Iceland, not in the Azores

The article on Látrabjarg states, "Látrabjarg, in Iceland, marks the westernmost part of Europe (excluding some of the Azores islands)" (emphasis added). Iceland is roughly 25 degrees west while the Azores are roughly 30 degrees west, so it isn't a close call. Is it your belief that the Azores are not part of Europe?--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:11, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Reference to the EU

Any reference to the European Union (EU) is out of place because there is a separate article about the extreme points of the EU, and confusing because the territory of the EU is legally open for change (expanding and shrinking) and includes area outside the European continent, like Spanish exclaves in North Africa and French territory in South America. I therefore propose to either merge the articles (extreme points of EU and Europe as a continent) into one or to strictly separate them by removing any content belonging to the article about the extreme points of the EU like "Considering Europe as an abbreviation for the European Union..." in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.209.35.207 (talk) 17:10, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Mainland Europe

A series of disruptive edits by IPs keeps adding Dingle to the extreme points of mainland Europe, starting here. Ireland, Iceland and any other islands are not part of mainland Europe. Murry1975 (talk) 11:33, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

This is not helpful. The fact of the matter was clarified in the text, where its stated that "if the British Isles are included". That is a good 'exemption' if you like, to allow use of an entity outside of so-called 'Mainland' Europe. Please don't label people as disruptive and post ridiculous messages on talk pages just because of editing without an account. That approach is allowed and I've been an IP user for long enough now. Also, you are not adhering the the BRD principle. You made an edit, I reverted, but instead of discussing it here you commenced an edit war. Now: if you wish to make this change the onus is on you to obtain consensus for it here. Please do so. In the mean time I will revert to the original. 84.13.94.184 (talk) 12:35, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Now disruptive IP hopping edtior. Murry1975 (talk) 14:28, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

NPA. Please explain how reverting your edit and expecting you to engage in BRD is being disruptive? Furthermore, I have no control over my IP allocation. It changes all the time and I can't influence it. Regarding the matter in hand, I suggest an easy alteration that should keep everyone happy - change the section title to Mainland Europe and the British Isles. Anyone got any other ideas? Another point is that we should mention the extreme westernmost point of Iceland. It becomes Europe's westernmost point if the Azores are excluded. 84.13.94.184 (talk) 18:58, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

The section is titled Mainland Europe, it is diruptive adding the British Isles. There was no personal attack. BRD works both ways, your POV pushing re-insertion of misinformation, is failing BRD, it also fails WP:RS as no source is given (or indeed can be given) for Dingle being the Wesrternmost point of mainland Europe. Also the extreme westernmost point isnt Iceland, its the Azores and if you actually read the article you would see that, its under "Extremes of the European continent, including islands". This all shows your disruptive behaviour. Murry1975 (talk) 19:06, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

3O requested. Murry1975 (talk) 19:10, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

• 3O: On the actual content issue, I can see both sides. The section is on mainland Europe, which unambiguously excludes the British Isles, and we should be wary of loading things down with too much tangential detail. On the other hand, the sentence about Dingle is factually correct. I don't think it has to be cited; as WP:V says, that only needs to be done for information whose veracity could reasonably be challenged. Even you, Murry, haven't argued that the sentence is false, just that it doesn't belong. I can see a rationale for saying something like "Dunmore Head (10° 28' 48' W) in Ireland lies about a degree west of Cabo da Roca, but as part of the British Isles does not form part of mainland Europe". I certainly can't see any real harm in doing so.

And that's why, Murry, I'm pretty astonished by how you responded to 84.13. He made his original edit on 6 October and nobody objected for three months; suddenly you come along and he's a "disruptive IP hopping editor" dealing in "POV pushing re-insertion of misinformation". By saying that, you're directly alleging that 84.13 is adding factually incorrect information, has a hidden agenda, and is purposefully changing IPs to avoid scrutiny. All three of those are serious allegations; in the absence of the slightest bit of evidence, they're just petty personal attacks.

I think it's a good rule never to repeat an action you know someone objects to without at least attempting to discuss it. 84.13, instead of reverting Murry's first removal, I think you should have started a talk page discussion. Edit summaries don't lend themselves to thoughtful discussion. But "The fact that it isn't "mainland" is explained in the text. No reason to remove" was at least an attempt at a discussion. Murry, when you reverted that, the only comment you made was "Mainland not islands, DO NOT include Azores or Ireland." That's not discussion—that's a command, and I think it's completely the wrong way to approach things.—Neil P. Quinn (talk) 21:08, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

For information: it was another editor who made the change on 7 Oct 2014. I only came across this issue on 7 Jan 2015, so to me at that point it was a simple reversal to invoke BRD. Perhaps on my part a direct comment here would have been better than just the edit summary 84.13.94.184 (talk) 21:56, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

• Ah, okay. Thanks for the correction. If that was your first involvement, reverting with an explanatory edit summary seems pretty reasonable, although as you say a direct comment is ideal just because edit summary comments almost inevitably come off as brusque.—Neil P. Quinn (talk) 04:25, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

So the questions I have raised havent been answered. Why include the British Isles? The section is mainland, the rs I alluded to was that BI is included in mainland Europe. The inclusion can not be qualified with a simply note, why is this given weight to the BI not anything else. As for three months for ten years it wasnt. Time is no reason not to remove unencyclopedic edits. Murry1975 (talk) 12:15, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

After waiting over two months for a reply I have removed. Again no refernce to BI being considered mainland Europe given, no reference given for the two main islands of BI being counted as mainland Europe and the other island not. So WP:OR. Murry1975 (talk) 08:55, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

I put it back. There's no consensus for this. And anyway, it's factual. 99caspar (talk) 08:58, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Show it as a fact. Murry1975 (talk) 08:59, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Have a look at your atlas, and if you need to, get out a ruler. 99caspar (talk) 09:02, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Looking at it and its still not mainland Europe. Maybe you should have went to specsavers... Murry1975 (talk) 09:05, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

This statement clarifies it; "If the British Isles, excluding islands, are included". It couldn't be clearer. The section is about mainland Europe but this statement introduces an exception, and it's an exception that many people will be interested in. 99caspar (talk) 09:07, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Why? Murry1975 (talk) 09:08, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Ireland is not mainland/continental Europe

Ireland is not on the mainland of Europe. Murry1975 (talk) 09:32, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Both of those edits were made before the exception statement was introduced. The text is now valid, accurate and good English. 99caspar (talk) 09:53, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Again can you show it is a fact. That is all I am asking, and it has never been shown. Murry1975 (talk) 09:57, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

I already said, refer to an atlas. It's quite clear if you look at one using a large enough scale. 99caspar (talk) 10:04, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Its still not mainland... Murry1975 (talk) 10:11, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, everyone knows that, but as I pointed out, the exception statement covers it. 99caspar (talk) 10:14, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

No because there is a section that covers islands, and guess what, its not in there because its not an extreme point under that either. Using a qualifier to make a point isnt encyclopedic, especially if the qualifier uses an exception in the qualifier, in this case we include two islands of the British Isles and exclude there rest, even if there are no sources saying any or all can be labeled mainland Europe. WP:SYNTH, WP:OR and WP:POINTY are all against this. Murry1975 (talk) 10:30, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

"Westernmost point. Cabo da Roca, Portugal ( 9º29'56.44 W).[1] If the British Isles, excluding islands, are included, Dunmore Head (10° 28' 48' W) on the Dingle Peninsula in County Kerry, Ireland is the westernmost point" - That statement is true. Reference to any atlas proves it. 99caspar (talk) 10:36, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

We could have a headline "Europe including coastal islands", and include Ireland and Magerøya in that category, below the headline "Extremes of the European continent, including remote islands", covering the present list. --BIL (talk) 18:14, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the input BIL. Do you mean?

==Mainland Europe==

list what it contains, following with,

===Including coastal islands===

Murry1975 (talk) 18:40, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

The current edit by User:Zacharie Grossen is good. 99caspar (talk) 19:17, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

But it only gives to the western point. The article has to be neutral, i.e. we treat every thing the same on here, hence why I asked why one island out of the British Isles, its not even the most westerly point in them. Murry1975 (talk) 19:42, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

During the Last glacial period the British Isles were actually part of mainland Europe, so I think a footnote explicitly mentioning this fact and indicating the current westernmost point of them would make sense. But it's true that currently they're certainly not part of mainland Europe, so I'd drop the "if the British Isles are included..." unless backed by at least several RS. ZachG (Talk) 10:46, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Zacharie Grossen, problem being its not even the most westerly point of the British Isles, that's Tearaght Island, so the problem is really the OR of if we include two but not the rest, and say its relevant to mainland Europe. Which it aint. Murry1975 (talk) 11:04, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Ok, so maybe we shouldn't indicate any additional coordinates, but just a mention that the British Isles were connected to the continent during the last ice age. Something like: "Although normally not considered part of the mainland, the British Isles, located further west, were connected by land to the rest of Europe during the last glacial period." ZachG (Talk) 11:28, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

This statement is absolutely accurate; "Westernmost point. Cabo da Roca, Portugal ( 9º29'56.44 W).[1] If the British Isles, excluding islands, are included, Dunmore Head (10° 28' 48' W) on the Dingle Peninsula in County Kerry, Ireland is the westernmost point". It says, "British Isles excluding islands", so that excludes Tearaght Island. Having this additional information in a footnote is entirely acceptable, and sensible. It's maybe too detailed for the body of the text, but as a note it's great. We don't need to get into complications about ice ages and the rest of it. I really don't see what the problem is with the current edit. 99caspar (talk) 12:11, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

99caspar, it's "if the British Isles... are included" that needs to be sourced. Who considers them to be part of mainland Europe? ZachG (Talk) 12:02, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

No one does. So you could say "...are included in the area under consideration", but as it stands I think it's okay. It really is self-explanatory and I don't think this is the sort of thing to which OR applies. After all, we are not making an assertion about something subject to what one might call "research". We are just mentioning an ancillary fact, easily checkable in any good atlas, and it's in a footnote. It's also worth noting that the discussion has already been the subject of a 3O request (see above), so I don't really see how continuing the argument here is benefiting anyone. 99caspar (talk) 12:29, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

But you need to explain why they are "included". Why Ireland is so special compared to other islands (Tearaght Island, Iceland..)? ZachG (Talk) 13:00, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Actually this doesn't need explaining. The IF covers it. There's no need for a WHY. The British Isles are on the European continental shelf (unlike all the other outlying islands mentioned in the article) and are often spoken of in relation to the European mainland. Therefore it makes sense to provide this little bit of additional information. Ireland is special because of the extremity mentioned in the article. Perhaps it could be made clearer as follows: "If the British Isles are included, Tearaght Island off the west coast of Ireland is the westernmost point". 99caspar (talk) 13:46, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Continental shelf, that's a good reason! Don't you think it's better to say it explicitly like I just tried to do? ZachG (Talk) 14:12, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

No, that is too much unnecessary detail and is getting off the point. It's trying to justify something that doesn't need justifying. I mentioned the continental shelf merely to explain why the British Isles are often considered alongside, and compared with, mainland Europe. I don't think it's necessary to bog down the article with it. 99caspar (talk) 14:23, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

But Ireland is not part of mainland Europe and it's not considered part of it, so how can you mention it without any justification at all? And the reason looks a very straightforward one (most educated people in Europe have heard about the British Isles being connected to the mainland in prehistoric times), what's wrong about that? ZachG (Talk) 14:32, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

As I mentioned earlier, there's no need for justification; the IF element of the statement negates the need for it. It's like this statement in the article: "If the Caucasus mountains are excluded, the highest point is Mont Blanc, on the border between France and Italy (4,810 metres; 15,781 feet)". Note the use of IF, as a device to provide additional, useful, information. That is how the footnote worked. In the above statement there is no explicit justification as to why the Caucasus mountains might be excluded (nor should there be), so why is such a justification required for the text under discussion? 99caspar (talk) 14:47, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

But Europe is actually sometimes defined witouth the Caucasus Mountains (see Boundaries between continents#Europe and Asia) and you'll find many reliable sources stating that Mont Blanc is the highest peak in Europe (and even Monte Rosa second as well). What about the inclusion of the British Isles in mainland Europe? Again can you find reliable sources for that? ZachG (Talk) 14:58, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

The Wiki article qualifies Mont Blanc with the details about the Caucasus. Again, no one is saying that the British Isles are part of Mainland Europe. It's merely a case of including them in the analysis under the condition introduced by the word IF. I really don't see what the issue is. It is very common to impart certain facts, then qualify them, or in this case supplement them by footnote, to provide further information or a wider picture. Are you saying the fact in question is wrong, or that for some reason it requires elaborate justification over and above what other facts or assertions are given? 99caspar (talk) 15:13, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia. It is not encyclopedic added a fact that is about something else to one subject. Again to add to the that fact that is not even accurate and has to further worded is just too much. The facts are the westernmost point of the British Isles is Tearaght Island, the British Isalnds are not mainland Europe, the westernmost point of main Ireland is Dingle, these points are covered in other articles. Including them here with a qualifier to make them fit is not encyclopedic. Murry1975 (talk) 15:41, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Actually, in the way they have been written, but using a footnote to impart additional information, they are encyclopaedic, as I have gone to great lengths above to explain. 99caspar (talk) 15:51, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

No its not which is what has been explained to you above. Murry1975 (talk) 16:38, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't agree. You requested 3O (see above) and got an opinion. You can't just keep coming back every so often and trying again. For your preferred option to take effect you need a broad agreement. At the moment you don't have it. 99caspar (talk) 16:43, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

99caspar, saying "if Y is included in of X" isn't implication-free, it actually suggests that Y can be legitimately considered part of X (even if it's only a footnote). That's why we should avoid such things and make sure that everything is correctly sourced. And again, you'll find a lot of sources saying that Mont Blanc is the highest mountain in Europe (see an example here), but not for Ireland having the westernmost point in mainland Europe... ZachG (Talk) 16:45, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Please show me the edit where it was ever said that Ireland is part of mainland Europe. There are some possibilities that could help. For example, in the footnote: "although the British Isles are not part of mainland Europe, if it is included in the analysis ...", and there are other possibilities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99caspar (talk • contribs) 16:54, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

And why "it is included in the analysis"? You don't want people to know? Is the continental shelf a taboo? ZachG (Talk) 17:05, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Extreme Points of the EU

In the section Extremes of the European continent, including islands, for the southernmost point, the article states: the "Caribbean Netherlands" could be considered politically as part of Europe. This seems misleading for two reasons:

1. The section explicitly states that it is about points of the European continent, which in no way includes any part of the Caribbean. This debatably also applies to Canarias, Madeira, and Cyprus, though at least in their cases they are somewhat geographically close to Europe.

2. Even if we were, for some reason, including political overseas territories like Caribbean Netherlands in an article regarding geographical Europe, wouldn't somewhere like French Guiana or Réunion (or even Antarctica, perhaps) claim the title of southernmost point? They are equally "politically part of Europe", but are not mentioned at all.

There is already an article for Extreme points of the European Union, so I propose that references to EU territories outside of the European continent be removed from this article, and a link be included to the EU-specific article. Else, the latter could be merged into the former as a distinct section, mirroring how it's done in Geographical midpoint of Europe

97.126.29.123 (talk) 00:29, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Krubera Cave is the deepest point?

The statement that this is the deepest point in Europe (including Transcaucasia) and the world confusingly contradicts the article on that topic! And several others, all sourced. The cite used here -- speleogenesis.info -- might not be the most reliable. I think perhaps they're going by the deepest point potholed to? Veryovkina Cave seems to have been surveyed to be deeper, but not reached by spelunkers. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 02:40, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

The depth section is based on a misapprehension of cave depth

Cave depths are measured from the entrance to the cave system, not from sea level. Krubera Cave does not go below sea level. I am not sure how one would establish the deepest underground point of land in Europe based on sea level. I would suggest deleting the underground entries on this list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.44.135.112 (talk) 03:20, 8 March 2024 (UTC)