Talk:Next-to-impossible destinations

Archives /Archive 1

Cameron Corner - not hard at all

Cameron Corner, the tri-point of 3 Australian States (New South Wales, Queensland and South Australia) is listed, but while it is *remote* it is hardly difficult to get to. There no permit requirements, multiple roads there (2 wheel drive is fine in dry weather) and an airstrip. The operator of the pub at the site told the local news service that before COVID-19 it got hundreds of visitors per day [ABC Australia article] so it doesn't really sound "next-to-impossible" to reach. Any objections to removing it? --Confusedwombat (talk) 06:19, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

On that basis, nope, no objections at all. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:22, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) I would oppose removing this. While it may look easy to get, it's definitely harder than a bunch of other places listed here, particularly if you want to go from the NSW to Qld side. Before you'd go through the SA side and then to the Qld side, but now that SA has closed its borders, you need to go through another Qld border crossing but the nearest one near B79 (was it Tibooburra) is not open. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 06:25, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

On a similar note... Arnhem land gets about the same amount of visitors a day. The conditions to getting here are similar. We do keep quite remote destinations. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 06:37, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

SHB2000, am I reading correctly that you want to base determinations of "nearly impossible" travel on temporary COVID rules? I hope not. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:52, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Even without Covid rules, you've still got to cross the dingo fence which is quite hard. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:58, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

I would support removing both Arnhem Land and Cameron Corner on this basis. We already have a marker for the Australian Outback, which proves the point of interior Australia's remoteness. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 22:59, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Although I didn't mention that some parts of Arnhem land are actually hard to get to. Generally for me, Arnhem Land refers to Kakadu National Park, but that is only a tiny fraction of Arnhem Land, and that's also the only accessible place of Arnhem Land without a permit. Also Arnhem land isn't part of the outback (it's dry tropical) and permits into getting there can take ages. I'll remove Cameron Corner, but not Arnhem Land. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 01:37, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Would it be enough to add something like this, perhaps near the start of Understand?

Some countries have large sparsely-populated regions where most destinations are difficult to access. Good roads (or any roads) may not exist, and there may be no commercial scheduled boats or flights. Bush planes can often be used, but that tends to be expensive. Examples include Australia's Outback, much of Canada's North and large parts of Amazonia. On the other hand, some places in those regions may be easy to get to; for example Uluru or Whitehorse can be reached either by highway or on commercial flights. We do not include all the hard-to-reach destinations in those regions here; see the region and destination articles.

Pashley (talk) 04:14, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

@Pashley: LGTM. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:13, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

I added approximately that text at Next-to-impossible_destinations#What's_not_included_here, but will leave the questions of whether that means Cameron Corner can now be deleted here & whether it should be added elsewhere to those who know the region. Pashley (talk) 08:27, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Deleted it some time ago. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:51, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Darien Gap with an accent

Darién Gap or Darien Gap? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 06:47, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

The Wikipedia articles in both English and Spanish have the accent (as do many others), although it is missing from the English label in Wikidata. I suppose the accent is there in the original name, and sometimes left out in English only because English is sloppy with accents. –LPfi (talk) 12:09, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Agree. The only time I accent things is on café even though Australian/American spelling omit the accent (British still does) but only because it looks slightly more decorative. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:13, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

There are a few words (none of them, to my knowledge, borrowed to English) where the accent is the only thing distinguishing meaning in Spanish, so it seems obvious that if formatting allows, it should be used. Hobbitschuster (talk) 16:51, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

I support the accent in this name. I find it strange as hell to have an accent added to the word "cafe" all the time, though. We probably use the Italian spelling of "caffe" as often as we use the accent in the U.S. - which is to say, only when the establishment in question wants to seem authentically French (or, in the other case, Italian). Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:24, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

You'd never find the accent in Australia either unless it's an authentic French cafe. But it just looks nicer ;) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 22:55, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Not to an American. I would propose for the default in the U.S. to lack an accent. I'll propose that in Wikivoyage:Spelling and refer to this thread. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:20, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Same. I'd prefer the US/Australian with no accent, rather than the British/Canadian with half accents. Although I myself have been sloppy with accents these days, so much to have stuffed up a template on the French Wikivoyage (spelled "modèle" as "modele"). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:10, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Berowra Waters

I have some difficulty understanding how a suburb of Sydney, connected by a cable ferry, is a near-impossible destination. There are often closed narrow winding roads, OK, but that would only mean that you have to go later, and perhaps cannot go with your Jaguar, but that isn't enough. I'd hope the real difficulties would be explained in the description, if this isn't just an inconvenient destination. –LPfi (talk) 08:08, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

It was added by a banned editor (Brendan/Telstra) though, so I don't know how we'll get him to respond. Probably should have reverted him instead of copyediting this one. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:13, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Isn't the user known for adding unremarkable destinations, listings and factoids? I removed it now. It is listed in Upper North Shore, where it is more appropriate. Edit that listing if it gives the wrong impression. –LPfi (talk) 08:29, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. The issue with the Upper North Shore is also that most of the article was written by him. I've more or less started to take him as a nuisance these days though, as I have learned some new things because of him. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:53, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Deserts?

The Sahara & Empty Quarter are mentioned. Should Kalahari, Atacama, Gobi, ... be added? Pashley (talk) 13:27, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

How inaccessible are they? I suppose parts of any desert or jungle are hard to access for non-natives. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

We might want to mention deserts and jungles collectively, like we do for other "large sparsely-populated regions" in the section What's not included here. –LPfi (talk) 13:04, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Russia? Really?

I'm surprised to see Russia on the list. Sure, it may have gotten quite a bit more difficult for the average westerner to get in there, but that does not necessary apply for the rest of the world. There are plenty of airlines still flying into Russia (e.g. Turkish Airlines or Emirates) . El Grafo (talk) 13:21, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

I agree. It was added recently by a user with half a dozen edits. What's not included here includes temporary difficulties, which I really hope this is. The problems with credit cards and consular assistance should probably be added to some article, but one that people going to countries under boycott would read – but probably they are handled well enough in the country articles. –LPfi (talk) 13:39, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

No we should not have Russia (in its entirety) on the list. The article is really mainly for places that are remote and inaccessible for natural reasons. North Korea, where foreigners are banned from visiting anyplace where your guide doesn't take you would also qualify (is there some other authoritarian states with similar policies?).

This is why I'm a bit curious about the first point in "What's not included here" about large sparsely populated regions. If there are large land areas where one may be hundreds of kilometers away from settlements and transport infrastructure, those should definitely be included. Yes, they may include the occasional mining community or native settlement with an airfield but those tend to be "islands in a sea of untouched nature" and if one looks at a map, much of Asian Russia falls in that category. --Ypsilon (talk) 16:00, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Listing Russia in its entirety is ridiculous and smells of ethnocentrism. Thank for removing it, LPfi. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 21:02, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

@Ypsilon: Note how it continues (the second sentence from the end of the bullet): "Such regions are mentioned below, but we do not try to list all the hard-to-reach destinations within them; see the region and destination articles for that."

So the regions are mentioned, but as a collective (so Northern Siberia, not Dudinka and Tura; Norilsk is mentioned as an example of a closed city in the region). And not all such regions, there are several remote rainforests and deserts not mentioned ("").

–LPfi (talk) 04:52, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Aral Sea?

Should this article be listed here? Aral_Sea#Get_in says it is quite difficult to reach. Pashley (talk) 11:41, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

There is says Moynoq can be reached by taxi and for the lake itself you can book jeep tours from Nukus and Aral. Certinly difficult, but it doesn't seem to be next-to-impossible to me... El Grafo (talk) 11:15, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

I agree. Anything to where you can just book a ticket and be there in a week is not next-to-impossible. To qualify, the destination should require some real effort. Sadly, such places are becoming fewer, as companies catering to rich people who want to do extraordinary things are appearing all around.

An acquaintance of mine (Finnish) was hiking in the Urals in the 1990s (knowing him, it might have been in what now is the Yugyd Va National Park). Suddenly there was a helicopter coming: a group (Americans? Germans?) had been promised to be the first Westerners getting there. The two ways of doing it.

It is also odd when you go somewhere really off, and then you meet locals, for whom that's the normal place to live :-)

–LPfi (talk) 13:40, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

"removing discriminatory ablist language"

@Nicole Sharp Regarding this comment. I elaborated on the point further in Stay healthy. Ypsilon (talk) 15:25, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

• There are many famous voyages to "impossible" destinations successfully completed by disabled people. Check this list for example: "list of Antarctic expeditions".
  • 2016: Luke Robertson voyaged solo unsupported and unsassisted from the Antarctic coast to the South Pole despite having an artificial pacemaker.
  • 2012: Grant Korgan voyaged by hand (not foot!) for 12 days across 75 miles of Antarctica at negative 45 degrees despite being paralyzed from the waist down with a spinal injury
  • 2004: Jan Mela voyaged for 9 days across Antarctica at the age of 15 with no outside assistance despite being a double amputee

Nicole Sharp (talk) 15:46, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Instead of saying "don't have health problems" (which isn't really helpful advice), the edits that you added are much more helpful: list specifically what tasks are needed to be done to survive and what kinds of limitations might prevent completing those tasks. Then people can decide for themselves whether or not it is safe based on their knowledge of their own health. Nicole Sharp (talk) 15:46, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Really impressive feats you've listed there.

Would maybe illnesses or medical issues be a better word? For example if you have a heart attack or have diabetes with an implanted insulin dispenser which starts malfunctioning, it's just dangerous where you can get to a hospital relatively quickly, but much more dangerous if it happens in the middle of Antarctica, Sahara or some ocean for example. --Ypsilon (talk) 16:29, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

I agree with Ypsi's comment. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 20:41, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Whether or not someone is medically capable of a voyage is really just between them and their doctor.  The best advice is to always consult with a medical professional before beginning any voyage that could be dangerous.  This includes discussing with your doctor any need for vaccinations, how long you can go on prescription medications without a renewal, how much time you should be spending in a certain position (such as on a long air flight), etcetera. Nicole Sharp (talk) 00:03, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

FYI: 11 Remote Destinations That Are Definitely Worth the Effort to Visit

Swept in from the pub

https://www.outsideonline.com/adventure-travel/destinations/most-remote-places-on-earth/ —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:50, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Good article, but I find it a bit US-centric. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 21:06, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Agreed: I thought it was weirdly US-centric and I'm an American. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:09, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

What really surprised me was the lack of any Russian destinations. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 21:11, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

That is one of the least surprising things I can imagine, particularly writing to an American audience (which Outside is, to the extent that it is an American publication). I could not in good conscience recommend anyone go there. It's no North Korea or active war zone, but there's a remote-yet-much-too-hi prospect that you'll be arrested for holding a blank piece of paper in public or something and then be a pawn in State Department negotiations for 19 months until an international terrorist is released in a prisoner swap. :/ —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Parts of Russia are definitely active war zones, in the sense that they've been attacked by drones and apparently by Ukrainian Special Forces, so things get targeted or torched every so often. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:24, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, that too and certainly the "parts" of "Russia" that are actually stolen land of Ukraine. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:27, 11 March 2024 (UTC)