Talk:Seven Summits

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Bass and Messner lists

Can some offer a clean split into the Bass and Messner (and the elusive other) lists? The article is pretty vague on what summit belongs on which list. A table would help. ~ trialsanderrors 07:49, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

This is the first time I see Mont Blanc being considered as one of the seven summits. From a mountaineering point of view I think it's never been so, as proved by the Messner-Bass list of summits, the only real discrepancy has always been regarding the highest summit in Oceania. The inclusion of Mont Blanc in the figure is misleading and a bit confusing, this figure should perhaps be redrawn showing only the popularily accepted seven summits. Dycotiles 15:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Australia

Continental plates has nothing to do with the Australian continent, which is defined by the extent of the Australian continental shelf. The separation of New Guinea from the mainland occurred only several thousand years ago, for most of the 40+ thousand years of human occupation New Guinea and the southern mainland of today were one landmass. The misnomer probably has more to do with the Rockefeller & Bechtel desire since 1936 to create the illusion that New Guinea is part of Asia to justify the Indonesian mining license they use to mine West Papua's gold and copper.58.107.10.36 16:48, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

As User:Viewfinder did not discuss his views here, I have written some feedback to his User Talk page. He has made a unfounded claim that "access to Carstenz is not always possible", and that, "Mount Kosciuszko has been recognised as an alternative" as a result of inaccessibility. Further he has not given any reason to accept the Indonesian measurement of 4,884m over the Australian and US measurements of 5030m.58.107.10.36 13:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Height - what is the source of your claim that it has been "repeatedly accuracy measured at 5030m"? I have accurate IFSAR data which shows that it is at least 100m under 5000m
I don't care what you have in your closet or elsewhere, I only care what the Wikipedia readers can access; and the fact is that there are two widely accepted heights, and it is Wikipedia policy to publish both when in dispute; irrespective of what you personally decide to believe.
and that therefore the height given by the Seven Summits movement is correct. Why would Indonesia and corporations want to falsify this? By location I assumed that you meant coordinates.
Yes, IF you had bothered to read the editor's comments you would have known better BEFORE you deleted the information. WHY have you deleted it again?
Perhaps its continent is disputed by some but it is recognised by the Seven Summits movement as being outside Asia. Viewfinder 21:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Six and a half million Papuans also believe the mountain is outside Asia; but the UN, US, UK, and about six billion other people have been told it is in Asia, specifically inside Indonesia which they are told is inside South East Asia. Which is the reason that silly climbers like Rex Pemberton claim to have claimed the hightest Australian continental mountain by hiking to the top of Mt Kosciuszko; this is highly relevent to this article.
Please read [1] carefully. Viewfinder 21:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

The 5000m+ claim is old and outdated. As far as I am aware it has not been claimed by any modern and accurate survey, although, like 7723 m for Ulugh Muztagh, it does still appear on some maps and sites. Please cite your claim that "it has been repeatedly accurately measured at 5030 m". There is no evidence that anyone in the mountaineering community accepts anything other that 4884 m. See [[2]] as well as the above link. By the way, the local 5m IFSAR data is not in the closet, I am willing to pass it on to anyone who can read and interpret it. Viewfinder 06:55, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kosciuszko is not a continental high point

Carstenz is not in Asia. I think we are agreed about this. Whether or not we think it should be, and even if - which is likely - it is a case of commercial interests overriding the wishes of the Papuans, it is under Indonesian control and within internationally recognised Indonesian borders. But that does not imply that anyone claims that it is in Asia, even if Bass did chose to select it. Continental boundaries do not have to follow international boundaries. Most of Europe's boundary does not. Wikipedia is quite clear that Carstenz is outside Asia, see Asia and Australia (continent). None of the island of New Guinea is in Asia, full stop. There is no dispute. Seven Summits used and recognised Kosciuszko because of access problems to Carstenz.

Also, even if Carstensz were considered by some to be in Asia, there is definitely no claim that the eastern part of New Guinea, which has never been under Indonesian adminstration, is in Asia. This part has many mountains higher than Kosciuszko. It has never been claimed that the Commonwealth of So Kosciuszko has never been the highest point of any continent, despite the implication by Bass that it is. Viewfinder 06:55, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I did not revert your original edit, and I have tried further to compromise. If you can, by all means provide citation in support of your claim that 5,030 metres is supported by repeated accurate measurement, but please do not revert again. Viewfinder 07:46, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

On further reflection, I thank 58.107.10.36 for raising this matter. The Bass list makes no sense to me whatsoever. The claim that Mount Kosciuszko is one of Seven Summits does not stand up to analysis by any definition of continent. If the Commonwealth of Australia extends over a whole continent, to what continent do New Zealand and its HP Mount Cook belong? A separate continent, Oceania? OK, but then there are eight continents (North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, Oceania and Antarctica), in which case there should be eight summits with the high point of Oceania included. I suppose you could exclude islands, and include only continental landmasses, but then if Great Britain (or perhaps Iceland would be a better example) had a 6,000 metre summit, would Bass have excluded it from his list? Viewfinder 09:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Highest mountain of the Commonwealth of Australia

"The highest mountain of the Commonwealth of Australia is Mount Kosciuszko (2,228 m)". Is Mawson Peak (2,745 m) not part of the Commonwealth of Australia? Nurg 04:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it was assumed that stating that Mawson Peak is the CA HP was like stating that Mount Paget is the United Kingdom HP. But according to Commonwealth of Australia Mawson Peak is on an integral part (as opposed to an overseas territory) of the Commonwealth of Australia, in which case Australia's HP should be changed on the List of countries by highest point. Any further comments? Viewfinder 06:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

No further comment. You're on to it. thanks. Nurg 07:15, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I left a comment on Talk:List of countries by highest point. If there are no objections I will change the article. Ta for pointing this matter out. Viewfinder 08:19, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of people

I think it would be helpful to create a list of people who climbed the Seven Summits. VartanM 19:18, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

There already is such a list, maintained by Harry Kikstra and Eberhard Jurgalski. It is linked to the article, see notes section. Viewfinder 22:23, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Any reason to keep Kosciuszko

As has already been pointed out here, there's no reason to keep Kosciuszko in this article. No matter how you define Oceania, it's highest peak isn't in Australia. Unless some very strong argument is made for keeping it, I'll remove it. JdeJ (talk) 13:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)