Talk:List of explorers

Cabrillo

What about Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo? Wasn't he important as well? How come he is not listed in the line of famous explorers? So please add him. 170.158.127.50 13:34, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

He is already there, in the "C" subsection (for Cabrillo, his last family name, that of his father according to Portuguese naming system). His name is written in the Portuguese form - João Rodrigues Cabrilho. The Ogre 15:28, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism...

Please 170.158.127.50 refrain from experimenting with the articles in such a way that may be considered as vandalism. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. Thanks. The Ogre 18:15, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

More vandalism

The red section in the main explorers box can definitely be counted as vandalism. We should stop this person that obviously doesn't want to help Wikipedia, but use it as a source of fun and vandalism to be supposedly cool or funny.The great Cube 00:56, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Ahmad ibn Fadlan's origin

What is the basis for asserting that Ahmad ibn Fadlan's nationality is "Iraqi"? He was active in the 10th century, prior to the establishment of the state of Iraq. [[ality, with our without replacement. Nationality doesn't mean much. I mean, it means something (often), but it's not overly noteworthy, and - as discussed above - frequently problematic, confusing or misleading. Besh (talk) 00:07, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

George Bass

GB's nationality is given as Australian. He was born in England, qualified in England, married in England and the purpose of his last voyage in 1997 was "to return to England" according to . Is there any evidence to suggest he changed nationality?

Dinoceras (talk) 11:17, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Separate tables

The sortable tables here are useless with everything split onto different letters of the alphabet. Any objections to me merging them into a single table? I've also noticed that some of the nationality links go to a country and some go to the related * people article, like Swedish people or Spanish people. As our article on Nationality states, it refers to the legal relationship between a person and a state, so the * people links really should be amended. I'm willing to make the changes, but I'd prefer to discuss first. Matt Deres (talk) 15:36, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

- Fixed the links for nationalities. Now all links are for people articles. Empirecoins (talk) 00:17, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of explorers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080423014420/http://www.sfusd.k12.ca.us/schwww/sch618/Ibn_Battuta/Battuta%27s_Trip_Three.html to http://www.sfusd.k12.ca.us/schwww/sch618/Ibn_Battuta/Battuta%27s_Trip_Three.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:17, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

This is not a list of explorers.

Dear wikipedians,

This page is not a list of explorers. It's a list of MALE explorers. It does not take into account FEMALE explorers, and treats them as a subcategory, as if the "default" explorer had to be male. The English noun "explorer" is gender-neutral and the list should therefore include women. Or it should be more aptly named "list of male explorers." I will edit it myself whenever I have the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.49.248.37 (talk) 10:56, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect. While it is an overwhelmingly male list (as is history it seems), it is not EXCLUSIVELY Male. There are a number of female explorers present. ThatBritishPleb (talk) 17:32, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Explorer's

Not all Explorer's are here. 216.93.130.18 (talk) 20:21, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• The landing of Vikings on America.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:23, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Delete?

Shocking there have been no previous attempts to delete the article.

Cons:

1. Each entry is completely unsourced - not a single entry ie. fair to delete all based on WP:V
2. It broadly covers a topic of 1000s of possible entries. I own a specialist encyclopedia of explorers, three very large thin-paper small-font volumes. The numbers are vast.
3. It is random. Canada for example has 90 very important explorers - our list only has 3 from Canada.
4. There are no criteria for inclusion/exclusion, other than apparently a blue link.
5. The list could just as easily be viewed as a Category or on Wikidata, which aim to be more comprehensive, if you want blue link explorers.

Pros:

1. The topic as a whole is covered by reliable sources, such as the encyclopedia mentioned.

It's only a matter of time before it gets nominated - then everyone is scrambling to save it, and 50/50 chance the deletion wins. Better to reconsider this page entirely before that inevitable day arrives.

Some ideas to improve:

1. Is a table the best format? They often squeeze prose down to a few sentences or single paragraph, making the page difficult to read and expand, due to space constraints, and white space. List articles do not need to be in table format, it is not always the best choice.
2. Do we want a comprehensive list, or a representative list. Given the vast numbers of explorers, representative is more meaningful and useful. Comprehensive is a Category tree and Wikidata, they were designed for this.
3. The list should be sourced and explained ie. why an explorer is historically important. Simply having a blue link is meaningless. There should be prose that explains their importance, and that prose should be sourced.
4. The list can be renamed Explorers of historical significance (for example), to make it clear this is the criteria of the page. What does "significant" mean? That's why there are sources and prose, arguments are made for each explorer. That's why the table is a problem, it doesn't permit the freedom of space to explain, in prose, why an explorer is historically significant, offering multiple POVs, multiple paragraphs, like a normal Wikipedia article.
5. It would not be a loss to WP:TNT it, and start over. Nothing will be lost, the page is still in the history tab, still in the Category page, and still on Wikidata. A clean slate with these new changes will encourage high-quality additions, soon enough it will become a better resource.

-- GreenC 02:27, 18 July 2025 (UTC)