Talk:Ocean

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Geography (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Oceans (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oceans, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of oceans, seas, and bays 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 / Vital / Core
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.

Volume of the World's oceans[edit]

This article gives the volume of the world's oceans as "1.3 billion cubic kilometres". The article on the Pacific gives its total volume as "2.8 billion cubic kilometres". What gives? Neither reference is terrible but the one for this article is a secondary source compiled by "students". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.8.37.201 (talk) 01:30, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

I've fixed Pacific Ocean. The 2.8 billion was nowhere in the source. --NeilN talk to me 01:57, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Southern Ocean[edit]

I am quite puzzled by the definition of the Southern Ocean. If I understand the article about it correctly, its definition and boundaries are not universally agreed upon. It appears on some maps, but definitely not on all maps. Why, then, do quite a lot of Wikipedia articles refer to it as a fact? --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 10:40, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Maybe because of this? "Despite this, the 4th edition definition has de facto usage by many organisations, scientists and nations - even by the IHO." Do you have any suggestions about how to change the wording of this article? --NeilN talk to me 10:54, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
To be honest, no, because I'm not a professional geographer. I'm just very uncomfortable about this "de facto" thing. The source at that article for the de facto part is an example, and though it's valid as an example, it's not a real proof that "many" organizations use it. I know that some maps include it and some don't. I don't have numbers. It leaves me confused, because I'd love Wikipedia to be consistent and stable, and I don't really know what to do.
I came here because my niece, who is studying geography in school, asked me for homework help and I was surprised to find "Southern Ocean" mentioned there. Even here textbooks are not consistent with this - some of them mention the Southern Ocean and some don't. Wouldn't it be nice if Wikipedia was more consistent?
So I don't really know what to do, but the problem is quite real. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 17:10, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Ocean[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Ocean's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "NASA-20140403":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 04:43, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

"Ocean" means "outer".[edit]

I don't believe the ancients ever used the phrase "World Ocean". "Ocean" means "Outer", so "World Ocean" means "World Outer" and doesn't make sense. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ocean_Sea#The_Ocean_Sea_-_a_page_of_its_own. --MarkFilipak (talk) 17:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

The phrasing in the lede is meant to relate the current term "World Ocean" to the usage of Oceanus in antiquity. Esoxidtalkcontribs 20:59, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

@MarkFilipak: How is the word "Ocean" related to the word "outer"? Jarble (talk) 07:05, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Mixing time and residence time[edit]

The mixing time of the ocean's water is not the residence time of a dissolved constituent, and so the article's implication that the two terms are synonymous is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.186.0.31 (talk) 15:48, 8 December 2014 (UTC)