Talk:Northwest Passage

Lead Poisoning
This article presents the lead poisoning theory as verified fact. From what I've read, a lot of scholars actually disagree with it - has anyone got any firm information on it? --220.233.32.18 01:50, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there is some debate, but the article mentions scurvy as well. I added a referrence, and a published opposing view. Pustelnik (talk) 17:54, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Atlantic-centric title ?
Isn't the title Atlantic-centric? Wouldn't the Japanese call this passage the Northeast Passage? A bit like Eurocentrism when using the term "Middle East".Frednofr 11:40, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The phrase "northeast passage" already refers to the arctic passage over northern europe and asia so it would really confuse things to start using this phrase to mean the reverse direction of the northwest passage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.69.138.33 (talk) 02:46, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not aware of any Japanese attempts to reach the Atlantic ocean via a "North Eastern passage". This is about Euopean attempts to navigate to the Far East, by taking a a north-westerly route. Commonly known as the "Northwest Passage". What else would you have the article called? Jooler 11:57, 27 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Our Hemishere is designated WEST. The passages are at the extreme SOUTH and NORTH.   That is why they are refered to as the Southwest Passage and the Northwest Passage.  Remember, the eropeans were the ones doing all the exploring of this hemishere at the time.


 * BTW -- The 1969 SS Manhattan passage and the Alaska Pipeline decision. I remember that event.  I did a report (extra credit) in my 4th grade Social Studies class when I read about it in the newspaper.  It was a BIG full page article -- and we were actually covering the discovery of the Southwest passage in class at the time.  Also. Popular Mechanics did a study article about how the problem could have been aproached.  The cover featured a Icebreaker-tanker-submarine.  -- Jason Palpatine 05:20, 1 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Out of curiosity: I'm not familiar with the term "Southwest Passage". Does this refer to one of the more southerly routes through the Canadian Arctic islands? Or is it a name for the Atlantic-Pacific passage at the end of South America -- either the trip around Cape Horn (the Drake Passage) or the channel north of Tierra del Fuego (the Strait of Magellan)?--A. B. 18:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)




 * When I was in school, it was the term used to describe the navigable route immediately south of mainland South America discovered in in 1520 by Ferdinand Magellan during his global circumnavigation voyage. Today called The Drake Passage or more commonly known as the Strait of Magellan.  I just grew up in a different era.  Check my userpage; it says "This user remembers using a rotary dial telephone."  Showing my age.  Sorry if I confused you.  -- Jason Palpatine 23:44, 1 July 2006 (UTC) (speak your mind | contributions)


 * Thanks. And yes, I also used a rotary dial phone -- for 2-3 decades. (Today, I just had another birthday -- this one ended in '0') --A. B.  00:02, 2 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually, the Drake Passage and the Strait of Magellan aren't the same thing: the first is the passage between Antarctica and the southernmost island of South America, while the other one goes runs between the mainland South America and the islands south of it. ikh (talk) 12:25, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Historically, the route from Europe, north of Siberia and through the Bering Strait was known as the Northeast Passage. Pustelnik (talk) 17:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

From the reading I have done and what I learned in school the name "North West Passage" is not as much a specific place as an hypothesis that there was a way of traveling form Europe through the arctic waters to the "East" where they could obtain spices. An Article like this need not be unbiased if it's title reflects a historical name or Idea (In fact I think may even make the article inaccurate just as tth N-Word article uses Nigger because it reflects most accurately what the article is about and not African American) that but maybe it would not be such a bad idea to have an article about the search to find the "N.W. Passage" and the more modern disputes, exploration and exploitation of the Arctic Ocean. But I think the Article in its current form is very well don and the whole Atlantic-centric idea maybe nit picking unless one can offer some sources supporting such a change.-- Nate Riley 14:06, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Lewis and Clark
This article is 100 percent oriented to the sea route. However, mention should be made of attempts to find a water route up the Missouri to the Pacific. That was the whole point of Lewis and Clark (and other interior explorers). Since passions run high, I wanted to run this by you before putting it in the article. Once we work something out, I will probably a start a Southwest Passage article about attempts to find water route the southern coast of California. Americasroof 15:36, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * This is about the actual passage from the Atlantic, through the Canadian Arctic Archapeleago and to the Pacific. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.249.69 (talk) 04:14, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Mention of Lewis and Clark is still warrented even if the article is concerned with the sea route. i just did a search on the page and nothing came up for "lewis". It should at least be in the see also section.Dmcheatw (talk) 00:51, 12 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree the earlier myth of a NW Passage (in concept, as it was thought to exist then in 1804) should be mentioned at the Lewis & Clark article, carefully copyediting and linked to this article, before it could be properly proposed for inclusion here. But I'm not sure at the moment how best to accomplish that. Fwiw, I've also posted comments to this effect at the L&C talkpage. El duderino (abides) 03:54, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I think this matter belongs in Exploration of North America. That article needs to be upgraded and turned into a master or index article with links to more detailed articles like NWP, L+C and so on. I may do it some day, but right now I'm not sure where to start. Benjamin Trovato (talk) 00:27, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

So does it exist or not?
The European explorers were looking for a way to get from the Atlantic to the Pacific without having to completely circumnavigate the continent. They were looking to PASS through it, that's why it was called a "passage." The idea was to make commercial shipping easier, faster, and cheaper. If ships have to go all the way North to the Arctic Circle - and those ships have to be massive ice breakers - would it be accurate to say that the "real" Northwest Passage was never found and does not exist? I say yes, but this article is very vague and ambiguous about that.

The reason I ask is that there's an article in Memory-Alpha that refers to a fictional "Northwest Passage" in Star Trek, which implies it's historical namesake is real and not just as fictional. I think that article is wrong, but when I fixed it someone changed it back. I'm trying to settle this once and for all. Gotham23 13:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * If you look at the first sentence in the article it says "The Northwest Passage is a sea route connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans through the Arctic Archipelago of Canada." and a quick look at the map also shows the routes. The ships that pass through here aren't massive icebreakers by any means. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 03:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't ask what the first sentence of the article was, wiseguy. I asked if a reliable means of getting from the Altantic to Pacific without going around the horn was ever found, making it easier, faster, and cheaper to do commercial shipping. If not, then the "real" Northwest Passage does not exist. So is this route easy, cheap, and convenient? DID ANYONE FIND WHAT HENRY HUDSON WAS LOOKING FOR, or did they find something else? If you don't know the answer to that, don't waste my time. Gotham23 18:58, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I certainly don't want to waste your time, so perhaps you should read the 3rd paragraph that starts out "No route suitable for commercial navigation was ever found..."--Feyer 21:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Gotham23, if you want answers then be polite. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:59, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

OKAY I WAS WRONG. It's the NorthEAST passage that was never found because it doesn't exist...an easy way to get from the the New York/New England/Canadian Maritime region to the Pacific without having to circumnavigate the continent. They hoped the Hudson River or Hudson Bay would be it, but obviously neither of them panned out.

So I make a big stink about nothing. SorryGotham23 (talk) 17:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

ESA study and the passage being "ice free"
The ESA study and its conclusions need to be carefully explained in the article. The ESA's assessment of the passage was based entirely on analysis of Satellite images. That analysis on its own cannot lead to some of the conclusions reported in the press. The reports from ships (Quark Expeditions) that have been through the passage in the 2007 season indicate that it is ANYTHING but entirely ice-free. And many people back to the late 1990s had taken small non-icebreakers through the passage (sailboats) on certain routes.

The main point here is that an imaging study done from space cannot establish the navagability of the passage. The article needs to at a minimum point out the limitations of the ESA study. 70.234.204.141 (talk) 06:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Drake and de Fuca
I didn't want to blind anything I'd ahev to tidy up much later but re this:
 * ''Cartographers and seamen tried to demonstrate its reality. Sir Francis Drake sought the western entrance in 1579. The Greek pilot Juan de Fuca, sailing under the Portuguese flag, claimed he had sailed the strait from the Pacific to the North Sea and back in 1592.

Drake I won't go into here, but de Fuca's account, or accounts of de Fuca, usually do comment that his decription of the strait and its people coincicdes with teh latitude and culture of the strait now bearing his name; I cant' add it because I haev no materials to cite it from, and tehre's bits around There's  a new interpretation around that suggest his "and back out to the North Sea" is really "out to the norhtenr sea", i.e. out of t he Gulf of Georgia via Johnstone Strait and Queen Charlotte Strait back to the North Pacific; no t the North Atlantic; that's not my synthesis, it's some authors whose book I read a review of, mabye I'll find out somewhow where that was. Drake gets a LOT more controversial, and like Farley Mowat has some fairly wack ideas about hte Vikings and even the irish coming across the High Arctic in an ice-free era, even coming down the Coast and settling in (wait for it) the Comox Valley; but mostly around there's issues around Drake's "hidden logs" and the decrypted, allegedly, meaning of them. Likewise, Juan de Fuca....anyway there's more to all this just in terms of details; de Fonte's name goes with that of Maldonado....Skookum1 (talk) 05:36, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Added by mumblyj
 * Juan de Fuca was a Greek pilot sailing under the Spanish flag while searching for the strait of Anian. Historical fact, no citation needed.
 * Mumblyj (talk) 01:59, 25 June 2011 (UTC)June 24, 2011
 * Mumblyj, everything in Wikipedia should have a citation unless it's unbelievably blindingly obvious. What you said may be a historical fact, but it's not blindingly obvious. Bazonka (talk) 05:52, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Sunshine 2007
"Scientists at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union on December 13, 2007, revealed that NASA satellites observing the western Arctic." Isn´t revealed a strange word in this context? It was hardly a secret. POV? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.112.233.164 (talk) 16:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Safe Commercial Shipping and the use of "again"
The third paragraph of the Overview starts like this: "There has been speculation that ... the passage may become clear enough of ice to again permit safe commercial shipping..." Huh? When was commercial shipping possible before? And where does the article say this? —MiguelMunoz (talk) 08:11, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * According to the Vancouver Maritime Museum web site, the St. Roch, a 104 foot wooden ship, sailed through the Northwest Passage from 1940 to 1942, from west to east. In 1944 it did it again from from east to west. King George VI awarded Captain Henry Larsen, and the crew, the Polar Medal for making the 1944 voyage. Russian cargo vessels have routinely navigated the Northwest Passage since the 1940's. Keep that a secret, though. Our friends at the BBC might be embarassed to learn their article, which started this whole "first time in history" silliness was, to put it politely, poorly researched and simply mistaken. Here's more if you're interested -- DocHolliday (talk) 05:24, 22 December 2009 (UTC)


 * http://www.vancouvermaritimemuseum.com/page186.htm
 * http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2007/09/bad-reporting-about-northwest-passage.html
 * I fixed DocHolliday's note so the external links could be seen. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 08:22, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

The voyages by the St Roch were government sponsored and intended to establish Canadian sovereignty. There is no way that they could be regarded as commercial. Any evidence of regular use by Russian ships would be interesting.Majurawombat (talk) 04:16, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Compared to 1979
Compared to 1979, Daily Mail published "Blocked: The Arctic ice, showing as a pink mass in the 1979 picture, links up with northern Canada and Russia." Awaited by shipping companies, this 'historic event' will cut thousands of miles off their routes.

What does this passage (ha! excuse the pun) actually mean? Compared to what in 1979? If you must quote the Daily Mail (hardly the best source of information), then it is THE Daily Mail. There is confusion about tenses, and what is the justification for placing 'historic event' in single quotation marks? Is it, or was it, an historic event or not, or is somebody being cynical and lazy by using single quotation marks? Such punctuation marks mean different things to different people, so leave it out. If whoever wrote this was trying to convey something, then spell it out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.207.179 (talk) 18:15, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Commercial shipping
"Until 2009, the Arctic pack ice prevented regular marine shipping throughout most of the year, but climate change has reduced the pack ice, and this Arctic shrinkage made the waterways more navigable."

This isn't correct, although I'm not sure of a good way to rephrase it. There certainly has not been any 'regular marine shipping' through the NW Passage in 2010.

Commercial shipping
"Until 2009, the Arctic pack ice prevented regular marine shipping throughout most of the year, but climate change has reduced the pack ice, and this Arctic shrinkage made the waterways more navigable."

This isn't correct, although I'm not sure of a good way to rephrase it. There certainly has not been any 'regular marine shipping' through the NW Passage in 2010. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.170.107.247 (talk) 16:34, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I would count a scheduled cruise liner as regular marine shipping - wouldn't you?Majurawombat (talk) 04:19, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Contradiction
"In 1940, Canadian RCMP officer Henry Larsen was the second to sail the passage, " "In July 1986, Jeff MacInnis and Wade Rowland set out on an 18-foot catamaran called Perception on a 100-day sail, west to east, across the Northwest Passage.[40]link CBC panel discussion. This pair is the first to sail the passage, although they had the benefit of doing so over a couple of summers."

These cannot both be right Majurawombat (talk) 04:24, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Eagle, Alaska; Why?
I would argue for the insertion of the word 'inland' to the sentence "Amundsen skied 800 kilometres to the city of Eagle, Alaska". As it is, it implies that he was not successful in sailing all the way through. If he was, why didn't he just sail on to a shoreline telegraph? — Preceding unsigned comment added byMultiperspective (talk) 21:56, 14 December 2010 (UTC) Multiperspective (talk • contribs) 21:47, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd have to look at the map to see where else, and where he started skiing from....but it's a long way from the Beaufort Sea to Nome, which would seem to me to be the nearest telegraph (from 1898 onwards at the earliest only). It's not like the Alaskan coast was heavily settled then, nor now, and telegraph lines are not all over the place.  Other than Nome, the next telegraph station following the grand tour of the Alaskan coastline would probably be Anchorage....Skookum1 (talk) 02:44, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah I just looked where Herschel Island is, on the Yukon coast, and Fairbanks back then would have been the nearest place with a telegraph; three times as far by (frozen) sea to Nome, where the next telegraph station would have been. From Herschel Island up the Mackznzie River would have been, oh, 1500 miles at least to get to......hm, Fort Chipewyan back then?  Edmonton?  Telegraph wires had arrived in Eagle (which is near Dawson City) but just weren't in place anywhere else in the North; and the terrain between Herschel Island and the Yukon River would tend to send someone towards Alaska, rather than south into the Yukon; some people tried to go that way during hte Klondike - over the Ogilvies - but it wasn't, um, a very nice trip.  My guess is that Amundsen might have been trying to reach either Dawson, or Fairbanks....Eagle's pretty obscure to go looking for it, but I'd guess it was where he accidentally found before either of the other dsstinations.Skookum1 (talk) 04:37, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 90.210.9.165, 7 June 2011
On 7th September 2007, Jeffrey Allison and crew were the first Brits to sail through the NW passage in a fibreglass boat in one season.

90.210.9.165 (talk) 20:39, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Source please?Bazonka (talk) 21:01, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. - Happysailor  (Talk) 21:07, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 92.8.120.50, 5 August 2011
On 26th July 1981 Sir Ranulph Fiennes and Charles Burton set out from Tuktoyaktuk in Alaska in an 18 foot open Boston Whaler. It took them just over a month to reach the head of Tanqyery Fijord in Ellesmere Island. Their journey took them south around Victoria Island, South of King William Island, between Prince William Island and Somerset Island to Resolute Bay. From Resolute they continued in the Boston Whaler south of Devon Island and around Cape Sherard into Jones Sound between Devon Island and Ellesmere Island. Finally they passed through Norwegian Bay, via Eureka to Tanquart Fijord. From the head of Tanquary Fijord, Fiennes and Burton walked the 150 miles to Alert where they overwintered before setting out for the North Pole in February 1982. This journey formed part of the Transglobe Expedition 1979 - 1982. Their west to east transit of the Northwest Passage was the first recorded voyage to be undertaken in an open boat.

Source - I was a member of the expedition and it was recorded in 'To the Ends of the Earth'. publ: Hodder & Stoughton, London, 1983

Anton Bowring 5 August 2011

92.8.120.50 (talk) 11:13, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Does the book put Tuk in the wrong place or was that a typo on your part? CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 14:04, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from, 13 October 2011
Please add to "Later Expeditions" In the same year journalist Cameron Dueck led the Open Passage Expedition (www.OpenPassageExpedition.com) aboard his yacht Silent Sound. A book about the expedition, titled "New Northwest Passage" will be published by Great Plains Publications in Spring, 2012 and a documentary series is in production.

Camerondueck (talk) 07:23, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Not done; see WP:CRYSTAL and WP:V.  Chzz  ► 01:24, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Transit by Nautilus
Why is there no mention of the transit in 1958 by the Nautilus. That seems appropriate in view of the discussion of the 2005 submarine transit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.19.14.24 (talk) 03:06, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Submarine transit isn't of concern, regarding the Northwest Passage. Ships traveling through are of note.Wzrd1 (talk) 02:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC)


 * The 1958 Nautilus voyage went from the Pacific to the Atlantic by way of the North Pole, it did not go through the Northwest Passage. Mediatech492 (talk) 05:32, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Overview accuracy
The intro states, "in 1493 to defuse trade disputes, Pope Alexander VI split the discovered world in two between Spain and Portugal; thus France, the Netherlands, and England were left without a sea route to Asia, either via Africa or South America." However the Americas had only been discovered by Europeans in 1492 (Columbus), India wasn't reached by sea (around Africa) until 1498 (da Gama), and Asia was not reached from the West until 1519 (Magellan). Seems that statement is in error or at least misleading.E2a2j (talk) 18:26, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete it, Lugnad (talk) 11:22, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

How much distance does it save?
Just a suggestion for something that would be helpful in the article: a table showing how much distance would be reduced by going through the NW passage versus the Panama canal between a handful of examples major seaports. Like there would clearly be a huge reduction in distance for a ship from London to Tokyo, but none at all for a ship from Miami to LA.

Basically, I'm just curious how much of a shortcut it could be? 30% reduction in distance? 50%? 80%? Clearly it depends on the ports in question, but a small table would be enough to get a general feel for how much of a reduction this shortcut could be for some routes. Unfortunately, shipping and navigation is way, way outside of my area of expertise, so I'm not able to do it myself. HCA (talk) 15:37, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

First transit of the North-west Passage
The first transit of the North-West Passage was West to East, was in the 1850s, and was captained by Sir Robert McClure.

Some references: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_McClure, faculty.washington.edu/karpoff/Research/McClure, www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/353976/Sir-Robert-John-Le-Mesurier-McClure, www.biographi.ca/en/bio/mcclure_robert_john_le_mesurier_10E.html, www.rmg.co.uk/explore/sea-and-ships/in-depth/north-west-passage/exploration-adventure-and-tragedy/robert-mcclure-expedition-1850-54 ... 121.73.236.171 (talk) 05:36, 8 March 2014 (UTC)8 March 2014

HMCS Labrador
Have the voyages and first deep draught transit of the Northwest Passage been deleted from this article? The 1940 and 1945 voyages of this large ship under Cdr Robertson RCN mark firsts in the exploration and usage of the Northwest Passage by large ships. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.137.245.209 (talk) 16:49, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Climate Change
"Climate Change", especially of the manmade variety, is still a very disputed political issue. It is NOT established science. In fact, despite "climate change", the arctic ice pack has expanded for the last two years. Since it is a matter of opinion, rather than fact, it has no place on Wikipedia. Instead of removing it entirely, the section's neutrality is hereby disputed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timber72 (talk • contribs) 09:38, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 * May be disputed "politcally", but the science is sound. However, as the section is about traversing the Northwest passage with only brief discussion of the science I've retitled the section and will remove the misplaced POV tag from the previous section. Vsmith (talk) 13:04, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The science is discussed at Arctic sea ice decline, don't know where the "political dispute" is discussed. Vsmith (talk) 13:22, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Good candidates for entries on the politics of climate change include climate change denial, politics of climate change, global warming controversy, and scientific consensus on climate change. JeanLackE (talk) 14:01, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

what is the narrowest width? (re the US assertion of the 12-mile limit)
Maybe I missed it, but on this an and the Polar Sea and SS Manhattan articles I don't see a figure for what the actual narrowest widths of the various routes are. Is it less than 24 miles in spots? Therefore invalidating the US claim of "international waters".....the navigability of such a stretch of water i.e. is it really part of the Passage, would be another consideration.Skookum1 (talk) 07:28, 22 November 2014 (UTC)


 * The narrow part between Cornwallis Island and Somerset Island is more than 24 miles. However the larger gap between Bathurst Island and Prince of Wales Island contains a few small islands. None of those passages exceeds 24 miles. So the 12 mi rule might apply. Nevertheless, the US doesn't adhere to the current international law of the sea.
 * The countries disagree on the way to measure boundaries. (There are at least two other disputed areas of ocean.) Maybe the Canadians should build a few islands, like the Chinese! Humpster (talk) 00:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

List of subparts of The Northwest Passages
The Northwest Passagess is a designation of the International Maritime Organization and the International Hydrographic Organization. It would be useful to have a list here of the channels, sounds, seas, and gulfs that compose this region. See e.g. and. -- Beland (talk) 23:24, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Worthwhile Canadian Initiative
Up til now, the last sentence of the lede paragraph read
 * The Parliament of Canada renamed these waterways the "Canadian Northwest Passage" in a motion that was passed unanimously in December 2009.

and there are a couple refs. I removed this sentence because 1) The refs are both primary sources -- the text of some proceedings of the Canadian Parliament related to passing this law, and 2) more importantly, what does some name-a-post-office posturing by the Parliament of Canada have to do with anything worthwhile? Legislators do stuff like this all time on slow days.

I get what the Canadian government is trying to do here, but I doubt much of anybody besides bureaucrats (who have to) call this thing the "Canadian Northwest Passage" and we don't need to carry water for the Canadian government. If this is to be included, let's get some proper news reports (if there even are any for this non-notable snoozer), and move it from the lede to a Trivia section or whatever. Herostratus (talk) 19:38, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Update the article
The article is confusing since the most important thing, that global warming has now opened up the route, isn't mentioned until the end. In the meantime, the article begins by suggesting the route is possibly fictional and goes on to incorporate every update in the present tense, or at least as though it is up-to-date information. As a result, this article is ambiguous, confusing and uninformative. Other people's comments reflect the same confusion. Editing Wikipedia is not my thing, but here is an opportunity. No research required, just editing skills.47.156.145.87 (talk) 17:40, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * That's because the route isn't open all year round. It may be in some cases open earlier and close later but even now (2021) the passage is frozen in winter. However, some, or all, of the NWP opens up in the summer when the ice melts. It's been doing that for a long time. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 22:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Billy Budd
Rapisardi built an English (Oyster) 72' boat named S/V Billy Budd, and the Wayback reference goes to a website that definitely shows an Oyster 72. Rapisardi then bought a Dutch (Royal Huisman) 112' yacht and also named her S/V Billy Budd. Both boats ply the northern latitudes. Not sure which to which boat the Wikipedia article refers, but there is definitely not an English 110' boat with that name. He discusses both boats here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/billspringer/2021/05/13/superyacht-influencer-interview-italian-superyacht-owner-explores-some-of-the-most-remote-places-on-earth/?sh=11cf93f6a297 192.16.76.32 (talk) 16:57, 27 November 2023 (UTC)