This is an existing connection http://www.worldheritagesite.org/tag.php?id=205.
I thought it be worthwhile to make it more exhaustive, however, during my work on it I came to a conclusion there are some details in need of discussion before doing so.
1) Eurocentricity: What do we exactly mean by discovered? Angel Falls for instance were well known to the indigenous population of Venezuella before they were "dicovered" by Angel. The same is true of many of the listed sites (Tsodilo, Uluru, Grand Canyon, Kilimanjaro...). Do we mean first visited by Europeans
? This should then be a distinct connection, I think.
Interestingly, the reverse seems absurd. Rabban Bar Sauma was the first East Asian to visit Europe. http://www.worldheritagesite.org/tag.php?id=696
We could then readily argue that for the Chinese he discovered
Paris, Rome, Naples and Istanbul!
2) Archaeological sites: Very few archaeological sites remained visible and known in their surroundings (e.g. Acropolis, Borubadur, Angkor, Pyramids, Roman Forum). All the rest, which are certainly more than 200 sites in the list had to be excavated. Do we consider archaeological excavation
3) We already have a connection Recently discovered http://www.worldheritagesite.org/tag.php?id=411.
In order to avoid an overlap we need to define years for Recorded discoveries too.
4) What do we do with Secret locations that got exposed? http://www.worldheritagesite.org/tag.php?id=448
A good example is Auschwitz which was "discovered" by the Allies at the end of WWII. Unfortunately, it was well known to others, including many Europeans.
What do you think?