wikipedians. and sci authors in general. when you write "quite possibly the first european to see this species", i need you to stop for a moment and read what you just wrote. and seriously ask yourself why its worth remarking on, who was the first european to see a species
i swear its like, ppl hear that "discovered" is a bad word to use when indigenous people already knew about a species, and so they just changed the wording slightly but still emphasize the exact same thing, the "explorer", the "discoverer", the "adventurer" whos seeing things "no Man has seen before"
.
and like i think even using the most neutral phrasing of "first described [i.e. into the scienfific literature]" still has problems too. but at least its a bit more clear about what work the botanist ACTUALLY did- creating a formalized description/herbarium entry.
meanwhile "first european to witness x" is DEFINITELY not it.
