Contents

Talk:Age of Discovery

This  level-3 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

History Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. History of Science High‑importance This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Middle Ages High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Europe Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Portugal High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Portugal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Portugal on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PortugalWikipedia:WikiProject PortugalTemplate:WikiProject PortugalPortugal articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Portugal To-do: edit history watch purge Find correct name The airport is not listed as João Paulo II anywhere. The airport's own website calls itself simply Ponta Delgada, and has no mention of João Paulo. Improve key articles to Good article Portugal Lisbon Improve Os Lusíadas Coat of arms of Portugal More... Review Category:History of Portugal: lots to remove there Template:Regions of Portugal: statistical (NUTS3) subregions and intercommunal entities are confused; they are not the same in all regions, and should be sublisted separately in each region: intermunicipal entities are sometimes larger and split by subregions (e.g. the Metropolitan Area of Lisbon has two subregions), some intercommunal entities are containing only parts of subregions. All subregions should be listed explicitly and not assume they are only intermunicipal entities (which accessorily are not statistic subdivisions but real administrative entities, so they should be listed below, probably using a smaller font: we can safely eliminate the subgrouping by type of intermunicipal entity from this box). Requests See Requested articles Assess Help assessing articles. Need images Translate from Portuguese Wikipedia Wikify Vote: Watch this list — Edit this list Spain High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Netherlands This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles France Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. United Kingdom Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Russia: History / Physical geography High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the history of Russia task force. This article is supported by the physical geography of Russia task force. Indigenous peoples of the Americas Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indigenous peoples of the Americas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of the AmericasWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasIndigenous peoples of the Americas articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Section sizes Section size for Age of Discovery (49 sections) Section name Byte count Section total (Top) 6,819 6,819 Concept 8,787 8,787 Overview 7,004 7,004 Background 89 20,226 Rise of European trade 2,762 2,762 Technology: Ship design and the compass 1,621 1,621 Early geographical knowledge and maps 2,906 2,906 Medieval European travel (1241–1438) 5,565 5,565 Religion 2,332 2,332 Chinese missions (1405–1433) 4,951 4,951 Atlantic Ocean (1419–1507) 5,275 38,069 Portuguese exploration 7,969 11,523 Portuguese exploration after Prince Henry 3,554 3,554 Spanish exploration: Columbus's landfall in the Americas 3,225 3,225 Treaty of Tordesillas (1494) 2,962 2,962 The Americas: The New World 506 15,084 North America 1,149 1,149 The "True Indies" and Brazil 13,429 13,429 Indian Ocean (1497–1513) 32 9,346 Vasco da Gama's route to India 4,867 4,867 The "Spice Islands" and China 4,447 4,447 Pacific Ocean (1513–1529) 164 11,372 Balboa's expedition to the Pacific Ocean 1,571 1,571 Subsequent developments to the east 282 282 First circumnavigation 4,911 4,911 Westward and eastward exploration meet 4,444 4,444 Inland Spanish expeditions (1519–1532) 3,811 14,085 Cortés' Mexico and the Aztec Empire 4,616 4,616 Pizarro's Peru and the Inca Empire 5,658 5,658 Major new trade routes (1542–1565) 2,544 2,544 Northern European involvement (1595–17th century) 4,666 25,581 Exploring North America 9,691 9,691 Search for a northern route 3,406 7,328 Barentsz' Arctic exploration 3,922 3,922 Dutch Australia and New Zealand 3,896 3,896 Russian exploration of Siberia (1581–1660) 1,003 10,428 Conquest of the Khanate of Sibir 1,485 1,485 Siberian river routes 3,319 3,319 Russians reach the Pacific 4,621 4,621 Global impact 13,175 19,458 Economic impact in Europe 6,283 6,283 See also 601 601 Footnotes 47 47 References 42 37,122 Bibliography 44 37,080 Primary sources 2,782 2,782 Secondary works 26,051 26,051 Web sources 8,203 8,203 External links 1,644 1,644 Total 213,133 213,133

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2021 and 7 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MichaelD6969.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignmentbyPrimeBOT (talk) 13:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article would benefit from having a section on the origin of the term itself; when was it first used, who coined it, etc. I've found no information about this so far. If anyone can point me to reliable sources on the matter, I'll make the edit. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ausíhar (talk • contribs) 03:21, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Both terms are considered problematic, as they are both Eurocentric terms with white supremacist undertones. Regions encountered and settled by Europeans were already discovered and explored, The terms not only strip the humanity" this is cringe af lmfoa seriously who wrote this, remove immediately please chofl71.88.176.41 (talk) 03:09, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ive removed the parapgraph again. It was first added on 17 June so we've been fine with a lead that did not have it for a long time. The problems I have with the addition are: 1) None of this discussion is in the body of the article, so it shouldn't be in the lead. 2) It's not in the source cited – at least not the "white supremacy" bit. Given that failure to verify, I'm not going to assume that the rest is in there either, especially since I am not even awarded the courtesy of a page number to check.

If there is substantial discussion about the "Age of Discovery" – both as a historical era and a term – in reliable sources as Eurocentricis (I doubt "white suprematist"), this content can be added in the body of the article first and then maybe summarized in the lead. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:19, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On the List of Major Discoveries thing, it says that Cook discovered Antarctica in 1773, when in reality he only discovered nearby islands; Antarctica itself was discovered in 1820. The discovery of Antarctica is almost never attributed to Cook, so it shouldn't be included here. Someone should edit the list so that discovery is not included, or make it so it says something like "islands near Antarctica" instead.

I'm new to editing Wikipedia, but after I noticed this it bothered me for awhile, so i decided to post here. Please fix. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.16.33.4 (talk) 03:48, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Ruta de Cortés.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:38, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps "European Age of Discovery" would be better? - Francis Tyers · 02:51, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

probably Cleter (talk) 02:00, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please insert short texts outlining the Dutch, English and French contributions to European exploration 2001:4C4E:1E0D:2500:1881:A4AE:51D7:27CF (talk) 21:43, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Maritime discovery and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 20#Maritime discovery until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 20:51, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Renaissance exploration and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 20#Renaissance exploration until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 20:52, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect European discovery and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 20#European discovery until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 20:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's internal inconsistency here. There are 26 instances of words that end in "ward" (like toward and westward) and seven that end in "wards" (like towards and westwards). Three Ward words were either in a footnote or "reward". That's fine inconsistency, as is me mixing a number (26) with a word (seven) in the very same talk page sentence. Out there in article space, though, whole other deal. It's one way or the other, same as months before days and days before months. Or serial commas, as in honour, colour and labour. Me, I like Ward words, especially in motion contexts. But if most respondents here vote for Wards words, so be it! InedibleHulk (talk) 05:04, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Nashville whiz: Care to vote for, elaborate on or otherwise discuss an option? InedibleHulk (talk) 05:14, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your temptation to have a uniformed consistency in articles, because that's what I strive to bring certain pages as well, but here it's not the case. "Toward" and " towards" may well be two admissible ways to mean the same thing: in the direction of. However, in all English-speaking countries, besides the US and Canada, "towards" is the more common spelling. Regarding "westward" and "westwards" and other similar words in this article, from my point of view, it's better to say "sailing westwards" rather than "westward", and "westward expansion" than "westwards expansion" in a sentence. As is evident, these are not the same. But fine, let others have their say on this. Nashville whiz (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 09:43, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was your fine idea. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm not sure I know what you mean. Is it that new thing people call "sarcasm"?Nashville whiz (talk) 12:37, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No. Is this the place you suggested I bring my concern, the "t/p"? If so, there you go. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:39, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Making a (possibly unfounded) presumption, this is an example of Wikipedia having a high proportion of editors who are too used to computer languages rather than spoken languages. You get inconsistencies like this. Sometimes it is better to use one form rather than the other, simply because is sounds better. This would not bother someone who wrote poetry, for instance. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 07:47, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with ThoughtIdRetired. Neither is incorrect but in some cases I find that one sounds better than the other. I don't think that combing through the articles to standardize on one form or the other will yield the best results. Glendoremus (talk) 13:46, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Nashville whiz (talk) 06:24, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The coverage of the revolution in European ship technology is not properly addressed in this article. These are notes (to be added to) of sources that may be useful.

• "When and where a third mast was first fitted is not known but a Catalan document believed to date from 1406 shows a detailed sketch of a three-masted ship. Certainly within a few years of the adoption of a two-masted rig in England, there followed a third, and by the mid 15th century a three-masted square rig was in use throughout northern and southern Europe." (Adams, J. R.. A Maritime Archaeology of Ships: Innovation and Social Change in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe: A Maritime Archaeology of Early Modern Europe . Oxbow Books. (loc 2309)) and more within same source.
• "It is not generally realized in Europe... that sometime in the 14th and 15th centuries there appears to have been a fundamental change in the European methods of shipbuilding which resulted in ships capable of undertaking the voyages of exploration in the late 15th and 16th centuries...." (goes on to mention Basque shipbuilders). Basil Greenhill quoted in the report on the Red Bay excavations.^{[1]: v 1, 17}

ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 10:09, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a good bibliography under "Further reading" on the Exploration page. Is there a way to link this bibliography with the bibliography listed here, and vice versa? See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploration#Further_reading 134.124.26.122 (talk) 18:59, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]