Talk:Oh Eun-sun

Untitled

I have revised edits in the text that are not supported nor claimed by the cited reference. Please make sure to read the articles being cited to make sure that claims being made in the text is supported by the reference. I.e., there is nothing in the references that state that Oh's summits are questioned. The cited articles state that the summits have not yet been confirmed. The Korean Times article also does not contain any account of Oh's summit being questioned by other Korean climbers as was being claimed in the text.74.105.36.209 (talk) 23:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

As you can read in the following BBC article, "She is due to be questioned" about that 2009 climb as soon as she returns from Annapurna: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8646160.stm And read also here: Korean woman climber's Himalayan record challenged --Jordiferrer (talk) 10:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Those were not the articles that were cited for those claims on 26th.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 21:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

As you can read here; Korean Climber Delays Annapurna Bid Amid Summit Controversy there are fellow Korean climbers that have outspoken doubts about her Kangchenjunga claim.

I quote; "And then 56-year-old Huh Young-ho, a famed veteran South Korean climber who has climbed many of the 8,000-meter peaks including a traverse of Mount Everest, said in an interview on Korean radio last year that he just didn't believe Oh's timeline on Kangchenjunga. Oh said she and her Sherpas climbed the last 1,500 feet (500 meters) without oxygen in three-and-a-half hours in bad weather. Huh said that pace was almost impossible for anyone except perhaps a "superwoman." He also said, "If it's true, her last-minute strides toward the top were much faster than any of the previous climbers." Huh urged her to repeat the climb to negate the controversy." Qwrk (talk) 10:44, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Huh is not "Korean climbers" and current complaints have been coming from Pasaban's crew exclusively. That article is also not the article that used as reference for that claim on 26th.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 21:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

She is not the first Asian woman to scale Mount Everest. The first Asian is Junko Tabei from Japan. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junko_Tabei

Very good of you. I hadn't even spotted that one, thanks!Qwrk (talk) 15:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

LOL My edits are reverted and the POV paragraph is expanded. Nice.

I do appreciate the belated explanation in talk page though. Let's try to explain our edits first in talk page instead of just reverting from now on in recognition that there are differences in opinion of editors involved here. I think we can come to reasonable resolutions on our differences if we just don't devolve this into a revert war. The new references are much better but the text is still POV. In spirit of good faith I won't return the revert and leave the text alone until more conclusive details are released in the news.

Reference number 4 which is an outdated article when Pasaban had several peaks left to climb to reference that she's attempting climb all 14 18 thousanders is unnecessary and is just shallow attempt at trying to hide the fact that Pasaban is Oh's closest competitor. All the doubts about Oh's summit of Kangchenjunga is also coming out of Pasaban's camp. The references are united in this. Stating those questioning Oh's summit as "other climbers including Pasaban" is false and misleading. The reference's use of "other climbers including Pasaban" is Hawley's language when she was describing Pasaban's crew.

• I am actually going to change this because it's pretty straight forward. The portion of the text claiming that 2 of Oh's sherpas doubted Oh's summit isn't in citations.http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gJJSbed0lBqIiIqGr-y4HVeHXyUw http://www.explorersweb.com/everest_k2/news.php?id=18313 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8638718.stmMelonbarmonster2 (talk) 17:46, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Sure it is--it's in the first one, the | AFP article:

"There were several teams on Kanchenjunga at that time, one was Miss Pasaban's and one was Miss Oh's," Hawley told AFP in Kathmandu late Friday.

"The only picture that anyone has seen shows Miss Oh standing on bare rock. But Miss Pasaban showed me a picture of her team on the summit, and they are standing on snow.

"The other reason is that of the three Sherpas that climbed with Miss Oh, two have said she did not reach the summit."

I haven't revised the article in light of this discussion, but I think that making the entire debate out to be sour grapes from Pasaban is misleading. There is some substance to the controversy, and it does involve questions raised by others besides her. Steveozone (talk) 20:11, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

That's fine and it'll be taken into account in rewrite. No one's denying the existence of disputes here but trying to portray this as complaints from Korean climbers and "other climbers" when the complaints are exclusively from Pasaban's camp, cherry picking references and outright false use of references are unacceptable.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 21:53, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I've had my fair share of climbing with people from South Korea and till this very day I'm impressed by their strength, their skills and above all their fairness. Ms. Oh appears to be caught up in a game and record breaking approach to climbing, and she's not the only one. Having said that, the best thing I can do is fall back on my own experiences with South Korean climbers, and compare her "approach" to what is known to me. [One thing where past and current events differ though - and this is important to know! - is that way back when, the military was the main sponsor of climbers coming from South Korea.] The info we get from afar and through the media makes it hard not to see her and her main sponsor as almost one and the same, and history has always shown that commercialism and climbing tend to make a dangerous combination. Most important though, it's proven to be a sliding scale where "Truth" is the first and foremost victim. Qwrk (talk) 18:33, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for being frank. However, while we're all entitled to our opinions none of us are allowed to inject edits from our own particular POV. It seems pretty pointless to be lamenting about truth being victimized when editors here are injecting misleading claims that are not supported by references and cherry picking references that best support their own POV and reverting other editors. Being accurate and fair about facts reflected in references about Oh and Pasaban should be our goal instead of trying to fight POV battles here. Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 18:55, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Melonbarmonster2, I thank you but must make an additional remark if you hadn't read this from "in between the lines" of my last reply. When editing or altering _anything_at_all_ on Wikipedia, I _always_ leave my own POV out, as it has no place whatsoever in an encyclopaedic approach to things. One might argue though, that selecting articles of personal interest already consists of POV. [One favour I'd like to ask you though, and that is to try and re-edit your own additions while making use of these "::--Tab-characters". It makes things easier to read for me, and others.] Qwrk (talk) 19:11, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

All my comments are tabbed appropriately. Refresh your page.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 21:53, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Another misleading claim: "and some expert mountaineers have stated that a green cord visible below her feet is in fact located 200 meters below the summit" the 'some expert mountaineers' who made this argument was a member of Pasaban's camp. I'm going to wait for more information to come out and hopefully for Oh to follow up with Harley before making these edits per WP:GF and avoid a revert war but please feel free to give your input before I go ahead with edits.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 19:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I think your assumption of "the 'some expert mountaineers' who made this argument was a member of Pasaban's camp" is reason enough to delay any serious edit you have in mind. Qwrk (talk) 19:14, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

It's actually a very generous WP:GF assumption given the FACT that the cited reference for that statement is http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2010/04/117_64972.html which doesn't even mention complaints about the green chord which first came from Ferran Latorre who is a memeber of Pasaban's camp. This stuff is cut and dry basic wiki citation rules. I don't understand how editors can be reverting and arguing POV without a basic understanding of citations.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 19:23, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

The reference provided is clear enough for me. Please do realise though that Wikipedia is not a news outlet, so no need to rush into things. Good beers are best brewed when they get some time to mature. Qwrk (talk) 19:47, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, unlike opinions reference rules are matters of fact. If you want to cite Koreatimes to say that there are experts claiming that green chord in photo shows Oh wasn't on summit, the Koreatimes article has to contain that claim.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 19:54, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd agree with that, but respectfully, perhaps a careful review of the cites is in order (I've commented above regarding the "two sherpas" issue that you raised and reverted a while ago). Steveozone (talk) 20:11, 28 April 2010

Steveozone, you are not being entirely honest. Revert is what you did to my edits. My edits were explained and repairs of false references. Please don't accuse me of reverting when I'm the one who opened discussion in this talk page and have left your reverts alone instead of returning the favor. Here's the portion of text in question.

"Moreover, some of the summits she claims, have been questioned by other mountaineers, in particular, her claimed conquest of Kangchenjunga have been questioned by Korean climbers.

The citation from mounteverest DOES NOT claim that Oh's climb was "questioned by other climbers". That is false use of citations. The article only states that, "Some of her previous summits are yet to be confirmed".

The Korea Times articles also DOES NOT claim that Oh's Kangchenjunga summit was question by Korean climbers. There's NO SUCH claim in the cited article.

This is the type of dishonest use of citations that need to be removed and repaired if possible. That's sound editing, not reverting. This is the 5th example of false use of citations that I've detailed on this page.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 21:33, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Dishonest? Huh? Take it easy, my friend. Not all errors are dishonest, but I otherwise agree that it's important to ensure that the cites back up the material in the article. As to the specific issue I mentioned above, I was referring to your deletion of the sentence referring to the two Oh sherpas who questioned her Kang summit. As I mentioned, you had indicated earlier today (above) that you were going to revert mention of the sherpas because you did not find the info in the references. You thereafter did so. I pointed out that actually it's cited in the | AFP article.

Thanks for finding that. Check my comment on this above.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 00:30, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

On the issue of Korean climbers, the Korean Times article [1] quotes Huh Young-Ho as commenting that completing the last 500m of the climb in the timeline/schedule described by Oh was "virtually impossible," and further notes that a Korean climber reported finding Oh's flag some distance from the summit. Steveozone (talk) 23:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Again, you're defending dishonest use of citations. The article clearly states that a Korean climber finding the flag spurred suspicion in the climbing community. The article does not state that the Korean climber who found the flag disputed Oh's summit. You are not allowed to make that leap and inject your own conjectures based on that referenced fact per WP:or. And as I had already stated reports of Huh's comment doesn't justify claiming "Korean climbers" disputed Oh's summit in the text of the article. That's just ridiculous.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 00:30, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I've not reverted you; in fact, I haven't touched the article since yesterday. If I were the sort inclined to battle here, I'd have done so...Steveozone (talk) 23:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not going to chase down which shady use of citations are attributable to which editor. All I know is that I've already detailed several of them in this page and that they need to be corrected. Regardless of who injected false citations in the article, they need to be removed and text repaired.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 00:30, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit made on another shady use of citations: "Oh often uses a helicopter to travel from base camp to base camp and employs teams to prepare for her ascent in advance. The article does not state Oh 'often' uses helicopters or even that it's a helicopter. That's a classic weasel word. It's part of Oh's tactic to maximize the climbing season and get in multiple assent in space of weeks as the article clearly states. The sentence is also out of place and doesn't belong in that portion of the article.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 01:03, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

References

2009 Kangchen photo and 5 reasons for doubt

I've found the following page, which shows the only available photo of Oh's disputed summit of Kangchen in 2009. The page explains the 5 reasons why Miss Hawley has marked this summit as disputed, but unfortunately the page is in Spanish language: Photo of Oh Eun-Sun at Kanchenjunga, which has created doubts.

For now, here I translate the 5 reasons listed on that page:

• Images of summit peak. Miss Oh came up with at least three sherpas that day, with very bad weather. She made a video where everything is so blurry that images can be taken "on any side." According to the sponsors of Oh, the picture she took at the summit "is not made within the three or four square meters of the summit but a little lower." Miss Hawley said that the picture was "clearly not in the summit." "In the picture on top of Miss Oh we see rocks and in Edurne's photo (made a few days later) there is only snow," she says. Another South Korean mountaineer is preparing an expedition to Kangchen this year to try to show exactly where that picture was made.
• The Sherpas. One of the three sherpas told Miss Hawley that the Korean had reached the summit. Now, the other two Sherpas have confessed to Edurne that the Korean failed to reach the top of the mountain.
• The rope. In the photo of Miss Oh there is a green rope on the left boot of Miss Oh. The mountaineer Ferrán Latorre says that the green rope was only reaching 8350 meters, so the picture "must be taken at least 200 meters below the summit, located at 8586 meters." The sponsors of Miss Oh say that what you see in the picture is not a fixed rope, but a sling "which she used to hang accessories."
• Timing. The bad weather of that day did not allow to follow the progress of the Korean by telescope from the base camp. But critics say it is impossible that in just three hours she could cover the distance between the last field and the summit, which is the time she said she took, with such bad weather.
• The oxygen cylinders. When Miss Hawley asked the Korean whether she saw anything at the summit, she said that there was nothing there. Several expeditions that climbed there some days later, including that of Edurne and Al Filo, saw several abandoned oxygen bottles at the summit, according to them abandoned since a long time. Miss Oh said that "someone would have left them there" after she climbed.

Do you know of any english page explaning these 5 reasons? I think it would be worth adding them to this article, so that everybody understands why that summit has been questioned --Jordiferrer (talk) 00:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

There's citations in the article that already go into this. But for argument's sake... Summit was attempted in bad weather and photo is naturally going to be poor and hence need for PR photo for sponsors below summit. Photo quality was never and will never be proof of summmit. There are conflicting reports about what the sherpas said. We'll just have to wait until they're interviewed. I personally feel their statements are most important in shedding light to this controversy. Rope manufacturer pointed out that rope in picture is different guage than green guide rope laid down. Oh has won marathon races and there's nothing unbelievable or even unlikely about her time. These accusations are pretty childish although there's no rule against using Spanish articles or Korean articles for that matter although such POV campaigning wouldn't be helpful for quality of this article.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 00:54, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter so much whether she did or didn't reach the summit. What matters is that there is a dispute / controversy about whether or not she reached the summit. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia must report the dispute. It should be in the article.Jordiferrer (talk)

- please sign your comments. Thanks.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 19:37, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

That's a non-issue since no one has disputed inclusion of the controversy in the article and the article already contains plethora of citations regarding the summit dispute.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 19:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Harsh criticism of Oh Eun-sun

Just found a harsh critic from Juanito Oiarzabal, who holds the current world record for the highest number of summit ascents to mountains greater than 8,000 meters (with 24 summits). Read here: Oiarzabal says Korean refused to help save Calafat. He accuses Oh of not providing any sherpa to help save the life of Tolo Calafat. "Expedition funds of 5 million euros and she couldn't offer even a metre of rope to help," he said.

I think we should create a section on the article to add the criticism she is getting. Jordiferrer (talk) 12:57, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Juanito has expert authority on all matters 8000+. I can only take this quote at face value and it sends shivers down my spine. Lost for words..... Qwrk (talk) 13:56, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh has also lost her friend Go on the slopes recently and fully appreciates the desperation of losing friends on the mountain as well as the dangers of each expedition. It is up to her and her alone to assess the situation and make a decision for herself and the safety of her crew.

Juanito is obviously personally shaken up by the loss of his friend we all share in the tragedy of his loss. However, his judgment was inevitably clouded by emotions when there was chance of rescue on the slopes and as sympathetic as we are for this tragedy, it does not change the fact that each climber is responsible for taking on risks and dangers of these extreme climbs and making subjective judgments about his or her OWN safety. That is a SUBJECTIVE judgment that only an individual can make for themselves and you cannot and should not obligate or guilt other climbers in taking on that risk. Especially for expedition leaders, decisions about risks must be made with safety of their crew being the top priority.

I'm still waiting for more information from Oh's sherpas so the article can be improved.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 19:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from injecting POV sentences and sections in the text. This paragraph is not your personal "why I don't like Oh" paragraph. The readability of the paragraph is comprised when things devolve into tit for tat POV wars and I've already pointed this out about the first sentence and have left it alone for sake of WP:GF so please do not inject sentences in the text to accrue criticisms. Refer to WP:NPOV and specifically WP:ASF for further explanation. Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 20:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I think this reference is better than the one removed by Melonbarmonster2, and explains the situation in a better way than the emotive criticisms made by Oiarzabal in the very first moment. The information is taken from this site. It is a complete narration of the facts known by this physician, but it is in Spanish.

Anyway, the statements there are very serious and I think it is better to wait until Oh´s team* decide to make or not their own allegations.

(*)I think is better to talk about "Oh´s team" or "Calafat´s team" than “the Koreans", “the Spaniards” or similar.

One last thing: criticisms should probably be separated in a different section than “Biography".

(Sorry for my poor english)--Noventamilcientoveinticinco (talk) 08:46, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I quote from the reference I gave above [2]:

"The Spanish Doc claims that Juanito's group fixed the section at 7,900 meters in order to secure descent and therefore summited late. (Ed note: Edurne's team free-climbed this crux due to lack of rope.) However, they reportedly found on their return that the Korean team had cut the line.

Tolo was mentally clear and followed complicated instructions, the doc said, but asked for help to descend due to extreme tiredness and lack of food and water. Juanito reportedly asked a fresh team of Korean backup sherpa in C3 for help, offering a 6000€ fee, but according to M. Antonia, the Koreans refused to send them stating that they belonged to different teams." (The remarks are mine).

Nobody has blamed Oh for not going there herself or those who accompained her to the summit. It´s very clever of her to defend herself or those who accompained her to the summit from such a hypothetical accusation nobody has made. However, she hasn´t answered the questions regarding the two big issues.

Instead of mentioning all this, what we can read in the article about it starts with the following sentence: "She has been criticized for failing to come to the aid of ailing Spanish climber Tolo Calafat" (!) In the reference this is not said.

--Noventamilcientoveinticinco (talk) 23:21, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Messner voices his opinion

FYI, Timesonline has an article today in which Reinhold voices his opinion. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article7129132.ece Qwrk (talk) 10:49, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. We must agree with Reinhold Messner in that being 5 meters from the summit is the same as reaching the summit. However, the dispute was based on some "summit photos" possibly taken at least 200 meters below. The article does not say anything regarding the 5 reasons for doubt I listed on this talk page, regarding why Oh's summit was disputed. Do we have any recent news from Hawley? Jordiferrer (talk) 12:30, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Until Hawley resolves it, the dispute must be mentioned at the article, together with other sources. Jordiferrer (talk) 07:45, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, I thought we'd been over this before. I've checked and Liz Hawleys Himalayan Database has the South Korean Kangchenjunga expedition, Spring 2009, under record-ID "KANG-091-08". I've updated the records last night and it marks Ms. Oh's summit [still] as disputed. Let's leave it like this then. [Eberhard Jurgalski of 8000ers.com mentions her having made all 14 main 8000ers, and no disputes left.] Qwrk (talk) 08:48, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Birth date ?

Birth date is March 1st, or March 11th ? --Jordiferrer (talk) 09:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I see that a number of [international / local] Wikipedia pages on Ms. Oh use different dates. I've been in contact with a renowned authority on all matters Himalayan just now, and it even might be a completely different date! Will inform you [and edit pages] once I have absolute certainty about the correct date. Qwrk (talk) 12:13, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

New doubts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-10266282 11:32, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

She admitted it?

I haven't had any luck finding a source for this statement in lead:

Oh Eun-Sun later admitted that she had to stop a few meters below the Kangchenjunga summit

I will be removing it soon unless someone can provide a source for her admitting this. Racerx11 (talk) 03:50, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Instead of removing it, we must add a "citation needed", which I just did. By the way, have you read the full story of the following article? http://explorersweb.com/everest_k2/news.php?id=19771 --Jordiferrer (talk) 10:11, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

No I did not. I read the first paragragh (part of it, which is all thats available). I didn't feel like paying for the subscription. Although I appreciate that this doesn't invalidate anything in the article, believe it or not, I don't really appreciate having to pay $3.99 a month just so I can read past the first parapraph. Have you read the entire article? Maybe you could relate the content to this discussion. My next question would be, if the source supports the claim, why would you place a "cite needed" tag on the claim? And if the claim is true, then why can't I find a source confirming it that doesn't require me to buy a subscription?

As for your initial statement "Instead of removing it, we must add a 'citation needed'". by Wikipedia:Verifiability policy:

Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed. How quickly this should happen depends on the material and the overall state of the article. Editors might object if you remove material without giving them time to provide references. It has always been good practice to make reasonable efforts to find sources yourself (which I did) that support such material, and cite them. Do not leave unsourced or poorly sourced material in an article if it might damage the reputation of living persons (which it does) or organizations, and do not move it to the talk page.

By this policy and also WP:BEBOLD, I should, indeed encouraged to, have simply deleted the material in question. However, now that we are discussing it, this is perhaps the better way. Racerx11 (talk) 11:54, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I have not read the full article. By the way, here an article [3] that would support that we use the following sentence: One of her Sherpas, Dawa Wangchuk, admitted that the group stopped about 150 meters below the summit because of high winds and poor visibility. --Jordiferrer (talk) 12:56, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that sounds good. I would go along with replacing the Oh Eun-Sun admission with the Sherpa admission. You are more than welcome to go ahead and make the revision yourself, or if not, I will be happy to work it in the article myself when I get some time later tonight or tomorrow. Thanks. Racerx11 (talk) 00:18, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Done!--Jordiferrer (talk) 09:16, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

This following quote states that Oh Eun-Sun admitted she had to stop:

"Oh Eun-Sun later admitted that she had to stop a few meters below the Kangchenjunga summit, and therefore the renowned mountaineering site ExplorersWeb considered on December 10, 2010 that Edurne Pasaban is the first woman that has climbed all fourteen peaks." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oh_Eun-Sun The Footnote for this quote gives as a citation the article mentioned above, the one that costs $3.99 to see: http://explorersweb.com/everest_k2/news.php?id=19771 Even if we can't read the whole thing, the subscriber page for that pay-article declares "ExWeb Oh Eun-Sun report, final: Edurne Pasaban takes the throne".

This next Zimbio.com page has some "summaries" of similar and related topics, with a reference to the article (and others). It's titled "Himalaya 2010 climbing season, Karakoram and Himalaya wrap-up /31/ – Week in Review." In referring to the pay article, it refers to "... Miss Oh losing her summit status at Adventure Stats"; and later says, "The fatal cut to the story came however from no other than Miss Oh herself." http://www.zimbio.com/Edurne/articles/cYdsD33k3zQ/Himalaya+2010+climbing+season+Karakoram+Himalaya

Misty MH (talk) 14:12, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Added a new section: Next team to reach the peak

I added a new, small section: Next team to reach the peak.

It seemed significant to set this off; though it would be fine in a paragraph elsewhere.

I cited a quote regarding what a member from that team reportedly found, with its BBC News citation reference.

Misty MH (talk) 13:46, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Any follow-up articles on Oh's claims of "video and picture evidence"?

The article currently states that "Oh claimed that Korea's KBS Television had video and picture evidence of her summit that had not yet been made public."

Has it been made public?

The cited article reference says:

"Oh said Korea's KBS Television, which had its crew at the Kanchenjunga base camp during her climb, had proof of her ascent. ¶ "They still have the summit pictures and video records with them," Oh told reporters in Kathmandu."

A lot of folks would like to see the proof, if there was any; though, in my earlier update above, I mentioned that she said she stopped a certain number of meters below the summit.

http://in.reuters.com/article/2010/05/03/idINIndia-48188920100503

Misty MH (talk) 14:22, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Added Annapurna having the highest fatality/death rate. (It's called both.)

Added Annapurna having the highest fatality/death rate. (It's called both.)

Not sure how to give a citation footnote for Wikipedia's own articles.

Is that even allowed? LOL. (Circular reference and all.) Thanks!

Misty MH (talk) 14:32, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

You should use same reference as the one used at the original article.--Jordiferrer (talk) 15:39, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Unclear

The Acknowledgement by Hawley section is baffling. It begins with Elizabeth Hawley and Oh Eun-Sun's having a meeting, at the end of which Hawley acknowledges Eun-Sun's feat; it then explains that Edurne Pasaban withdrew her claim to have summitted first, but ends with Hawley disagreeing with Eun-Sun and leaving the matter open. And there's a

tag slap-bang in the middle of it. You've been tinkering with this for least two years; how much more time do you need? 87.113.124.180 (talk) 16:14, 10 June 2012 (UTC)