Talk:Geographical exploration/Archive 1

Archive 1

Ideas for expansion - where from here?

I like the issues raised under Ideas for expansion. However I would urge to find a mean between eurocentrism and political correctness. IMHO there is a big difference between the deliberate exploration by say China in 12-14C & Europe in 15C-19C (and we could look back to Sumeria, India, Greece, Persia, Rome, et al) and migrations of economic necessity of the beaker folk or the sarmatians or whomever.

There are some grey areas such as the Vikings where it seems many were simply raiders, but visionaries like Erik the Red and his son Leif must be high in the lists of the Explorers Club. I would argue that "exploration" is a valuable term that should not be trashed; and that it implies a certain amount of intent whether for profit, new homeland, scientific research, military advantage, glory, or sheer bloody-minded obsession (nothing else can explain the polar explorers as far as I can see). But I do think it implies intent to find something that is unknown at least to the implying society :o). Don't confuse "explore" with "discover" - nobody in their right mind should think that Marco Polo discovered China - or than Cristoforo Colombo discovered - um - India?

Phoenecians is a good topic but really just an exceptional example of ancient exploration - again I think we could distinguish between "mere" conquest, and genuine exploratory intent whatever that may mean. Polynesians is interesting too - their stories as later recorded seem to indicate their deliberate intent of finding what was out there (partly driven by population pressures); and purely from the point of navigation skills they must be in the Explorers Club.

Ramifications of exploration if carried through to colonisation is another topic as far as I can see. The debate about post-colonial era effects is so big that I think it needs its own home rather than being a branch of exploration, though links are indicated. For example, in my part of the world the explorer Cook is now sometimes regarded as a villain but in truth he was not a deliberate servant of colonisation - indeed he wrote that people in the Pacific region should be left to pursue their own destinies. Should he be blamed for what the politicians did afterwards?

In short let's not confuse explorers with colonisers though they do overlap. Just my 2c worth... Stevensims 07:56, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Merge?

What differentiates this page from being a rehash of list of explorers (other than the fact that it is shorter and Euro-centric)? - IstvanWolf 07:00, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Eurocentric? I would have said Amerocentric. --Iacobus 06:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I would have said neither. Naturally, the most recent history is best known, and the big, huge, discovery of the last 1000 years is an entire continent called America. What differenciates this from the list is the word "notable", and the definition of "explorer". I think this should be expanded, not merged.

added link: justification

Hassanein Bey has wrote books and shot footage and photos in his great adventure to Kufra in Libyan desert 1924 before blundred by the Italians. His Gold Medal by RGS in 1924 makes him and another Indian gentlemen the only non Europeans to have such prestigious medal with Stanley, Burton, and the others.

I am very knew to Wikipedia's culture of writing. The reason I put his link here is to experiment before I have the guts to put a page for the guy on wikipedia.

Your suggestions are most welcome.

I included space agencies because it is hard to distinguish exceptional contributions from individuals in the ongoing exploration of the solar system, as much of it is unmanned and relies on evidence sent back to people at "home" by robots. Nonetheless, the listing of Armstrong and Gagarin still stands. I notice that there is also a lot of underwater spelunking going on, but I wonder if anyone involved in it is notable. 204.52.215.107 22:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Jon Davis

Definitely not worthy of a mention on that list. By the sounds of it his exploration is something that every other student does every year just he happen to get caught up in something that was happening at the time. Why not mention people that travelled to LA and happened to get caught up in the riots? No difference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.11.153 (talk) 13:50, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Explorers

Did I miss it? this page could use the tag. Trekphiler (talk) 16:39, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Remote regions

I have removed the claim that Borneo, Libya, Iran, Madagascar, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are some of the remotest regions in the world. Whether a place is remote depends totally on your point of view - if you live in Madagascar then New York is remote - so this is inappropriate wording for a Wikipedia article. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:51, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Why the list, and why split by gender?

Can anyone give a reason why we should have a list of explorers in this article when we already have list of explorers? And even if there is a reason to have a list in this article why do we have separate lists for female and male explorers? I would propose merging the list in this article into list of explorers and just leaving a link here. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:57, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any problem with having a small list of the most notable explorers (or better yet, mentioned in context of the subject of exploration in general) - that being said, the current list can definitely be reduced in size, and the gender division is rather arbitrary. Joshdboz (talk) 22:09, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Modern "explorers"

I thought explorers were people who were going where noone had gone before them. The 5 men down the bottom of that list seem to be Guinness Book record holders, rather than explorers. Being the youngest to walk across the sahara, or the first to climb 14 peaks, is hardly exploring. Njb1969 (talk) 08:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Thule

In Scandinavia, "Thule" is often thought to represent Norway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.177.113.48 (talk) 01:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Sacagawea

leiw and clack r stuipd just sacagawea should be they

On a serious note, how can you add Sacajawea to a list of explorers? She was a hired hand and without Lewis and Clark would not have set off exploring on her own. And to not include Clark in the list at all is completely ridiculous. Then to pour salt on the wound not give Tenzing Norgay his own recognition as an explorer. When Edmund Hillary always said they were an equal team and neither could have reached the summit without the other. It is still not know which one actually set foot on the summit first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.79.33.185 (talk) 06:57, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Greenland

If Eric the Red landed on Greenland, wasn't he the first to reach North America? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.3.94.162 (talk) 01:46, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Tyler Kirby

Is this vandalism? "Tyler Kirby" is indicated to have explored in the 13th century and in 2011. Even in the 13th century, he is listed as being an American. The term American usually refers to people of the USA, not people from the North and South American continents. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Besh Saab (talk • contribs) 12:05, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

• Indeed, seems to have been vandalism by 66.41.105.62 Besh (talk) 12:14, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Dicuil

Which land Dicuil ever visited? I think none. He only was a geographer. So, I delete his name. Lele giannoni (talk) 22:43, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Time to Delete list

From the discussion above, it seems many editors feel we should eliminate the list of explorers from this page. There is already a list of explorers wikipage, and apparently it is more inclusive. Perhaps the "exploration" page should focus more on what is known about the molecular and cellular neurobiology that drives exploratory behavior in, not just various cultures, but various species. Either way, it may be time to delete the explorer list from this page and focus on something else. There seems little need to maintain two lists, and I am interested to know your thoughts. Thank you. Besh (talk) 12:32, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

• Since there has not been objection thus far, I am beginning to formulate the transition of this page from a list to a real source of useful information for Wikiusers. It makes sense to me to retain part of the current list in a subheading titled "Notable Periods of Human Exploration" - any comments?? Besh (talk) 08:55, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
• OK, I made the change and hope most editors feel it is an improvement. There is no dedicated wikipedia page that describes major periods of human exploration, so hopefully this new section here can expand organically and become something very useful and interesting to readers. Please help add references if you know/find any. Besh (talk) 21:37, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Capitol letter in section titles?

Why are there so many capitol letter in section titles? --109.54.16.116 (talk) 19:17, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Appears to be in compliance with MOS:HEAD now. ~KvnG 13:32, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Exploration in animals?

The intro mentions that "exploration occurs in all non-sessile animal species", but doesn't elaborate on that statement. If this is considered to be within this article's scope, the article probably merits a section on exploratory behavior in non-human organisms. If not, it might be worth creating a page on "Exploratory behavior" or something discussing the ways in which animals familiarize themselves with their environment. Such a page could also cover information-seeking behavior in humans and perhaps in AI research. (By the way, the quoted statement is not really true, since there are some pelagic species that basically just drift around and do not actively explore in any meaningful sense.) 138.16.18.24 (talk) 03:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Indeed. Or maybe splitting in two articles, one related to human exploration. --109.54.16.116 (talk) 19:18, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Let's add it here first. If there's enough material generated, we can then consider a split. ~KvnG 13:35, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Prehistoric Exploration?

Is it worth including on this page a mention of the explorations done pre-historically, or does Exploration include the idea that the data or explorers from the exploration are returned to the source? That is to say, should we include Early human migration as a section here (I've put it into the See Also)? 1bandsaw (talk) 22:59, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I think inclusion in See also is too subtle. I support discussing it in the article and have added this to the todo list. ~KvnG 13:37, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Update name from "Exploration" to "Human Exploration"

This page is within the scope of History and Geography and should therefore probably remain human-centric. However, the act of exploration is not a human-specific phenomenon, nor is interest in exploration limited to human history. There is much known about the biology of exploration, in terms of brain circuits and molecules that contribute to this vital behavior. It might be best therefore to create an entirely new page titled "Exploration", and change the title of this current page to "Human Exploration". Thoughts?? Besh (talk) 10:42, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't think we need to make a decision on this immediately. Let's get some content in this article first and then see how it looks. ~KvnG 13:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Update status from "List" to "Start"

Since the article is no longer a list, its status might be better described as "Start". The page provides interesting information, but much is lacking. Moreover, although it is well integrated into the framework of other wikipages, it is currently lacking in original references. It could become an interesting article describing the history of human exploration if proper attention is given to it by experts in the field. Besh (talk) 10:42, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done ~KvnG 13:42, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Anthropocentric

Exploratory behavior is something any mobile animal species engages in, not just humans.... --Crusio (talk) 17:00, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Discussing animal exploration has been added to the todo list. ~KvnG 13:44, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Language straight from a 1950s history book

Can we change the language from 'discovered' to 'first European to discover' or better still, 'first to document'? This isn't the 1930s, that language seems from a bygone era. --Harburg (talk) 03:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

It looks like this was addressed at some point. ~KvnG 13:47, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Ideas for expansion

Some ideas in no particular order for expanding this article into a proper history of exploration (please add):

1. Age of Exploration is heavily eurocentric, this article could be an opportunity to partly rectify this
2. Exploration in mythology.
3. Early human migrations as exploration.
4. Early sailors, i.e. Phoenicians
5. Expansion into the Pacific by Polynesians
6. Exploration of polar regions
7. Exploration of the Ocean floor
8. Manned and Unmanned space exploration
9. Exploration during the time of the Ancient world.
10. Early European exploration - vikings, vinland, etc.
11. Finding the headwaters of great rivers - Livingston, etc.
12. Modern explorers
13. Chinese/Korean exploration - they had some remarkably detailed maps before the Europeans
14. Explorations by other cultures not yet mentioned.
15. Political and economic consequences of exploration.
16. Link between exploration and technological advancement.

I have copied these ideas to Talk:Exploration/to do. ~KvnG 14:16, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

George Vancouver

I don't know what the inclusion criteria are on this page, but I was surprised not to find any mention of George Vancouver.

Vancouver Island, the city of Vancouver in British Columbia, as well as Vancouver, Washington in the United States, are all named for him. Mount Vancouver, on the Canadian–US border between Yukon and Alaska, and New Zealand's sixth-highest mountain, also Mount Vancouver, are also named for him.

— MaxEnt 06:14, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

The scope of this article is the concept of exploration, as implied by the title. Specific explorers are generally out of scope. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 02:53, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

To do list

I read through past and current discussion on this page and created a to do list for improvement of this article. If anything in the list is controversial, please move it to this section and discuss. ~KvnG 14:27, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Great list! DFlhb (talk) 11:45, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Minor PoV issue

Exploration, particularly its understanding and use, has been critically discussed as historically being framed and used, at the latest since the Age of Discovery up to the contemporary age of space exploration, for colonialistic ventures, discrimination and exploitation, by reinvigorating concepts such as the "frontier" (as in frontierism) and manifest destiny.

I'm removing this from the article and moving it here, since as I understand it, it represents a viewpoint from the much smaller field of postcolonial studies, rather than constituting consensus within the fields of history or geography, where, from what I can see, it is a somewhat more fringe view, posing somewhat of a WP:POV issue. It would need to at least be attributed, but someone better versed with the topic would do a better job at that than me. The passage is also poorly contextualized within this article's topic, and seems sourced mostly to op-eds rather than scientific literature. I was thinking this could belong better at the end of a section on exploration's links to conquest, but I'm not sure if such a section would be useful rather than being redundant with individual instances of conquest within the "notable historical periods" section.

References

DFlhb (talk) 18:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC)