This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Climbing High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climbing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climbing 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.ClimbingWikipedia:WikiProject ClimbingTemplate:WikiProject ClimbingClimbing High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. Lists Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Mountains Mid‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

It was written about by AAC [1], ExplorersWeb [2], GearJunkie [3]; Los Angeles Times[4]; he authored works about it, or mentioning it; published in a peer-reviewed physical geography journal [5], AAJ [6], and the Conversation [7], which was then syndicated to multiple other reputable news sites (ie, [8]).

The rationale for reverting my addition of this first ascent of Alpomish was WP:NOTEVERYTHING, yet this feat is itself notable per WP:GNG and Eric Gilbertson is also notable, is a higher point than more than half of the first ascents in this list, and is the highest recorded point in a country. This seems unquestionably to satisfy the description in this list.

@Graywalls, can you clarify your position as to why this first ascent should not be in this list of first ascents? Revolving Doormat (talk) 07:33, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You'd be hard pressed to even find reliable published source on "Alpomish" that isn't WP:UGC. Graywalls (talk) 08:31, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not a single source of the 7 listed above qualifies as WP:UGC.

Websites whose content is largely user-generated are generally unacceptable as sources. Sites with user-generated content include personal websites, personal and group blogs (excluding newspaper and magazine blogs), Internet forums, social media sites, fansites, video and image hosting services, most wikis, and other collaboratively created websites.

Can you provide me with consensus that exists anywhere that the Progress in Physical Geography journal, the American Alpine Journal, The Conversation, the Los Angeles Times; or the editorial content from the American Alpine Club, ExplorersWeb, or Gear Junkie, are considered WP:UGC or are otherwise not WP:RS?

Are you suggesting this mountain is made up? What is the reason for the scare quotes? It was added to GeoNames, one of the official databases of geographical places. [9] There are many unnamed mountains that are not named until they are first ascended. Revolving Doormat (talk) 12:46, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Official? "GeoNames (or GeoNames.org) is a user-editable geographical database available and accessible through various web services"

"As in other crowdsourcing schemes, GeoNames edit interface allows everyone to sign in and edit the database, hence false information can be entered and such information can remain undetected especially for places that are not accessed frequently." (emphasis by me) Graywalls (talk) 18:10, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I assumed because it is on Wikidata's identifiers that it was an official source and checked it earlier for depreciation and it wasn't listed. I concede on that point. Revolving Doormat (talk) 18:23, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]