Talk:Pacific Ocean/Archive 1
|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.|
- 1 percipation
- 2 size
- 3 Southwestern limit
- 4 Ocean depth
- 5 Pictures
- 6 Other Names
- 7 East vs. Eastern
- 8 pandeism and hinduism
- 9 Melbourne
- 10 Marine Pollution
- 11 Integral map image necessary
- 12 Magellan
- 13 Reinstate the Overview section (or expand the Lead section a bit)
- 14 Vice Bune
- 15 Proposed oceans project
- 16 Pacific Ocean
- 17 169.2 or 179.7?
- 18 Mariana Trench
- 19 History and economy
- 20 Volume
- 21 East, West and Central Pacific?
- 22 Tides?
- 23 Huh?
- 24 Surface Area Inconsistent
- 25 Original Name isn't Latin
- 26 enviromental features
- 27 Specification of Area.
- 28 Dubious: 25,000 islands more than the rest of the world combined
- 29 vandalism
- 30 Straits or Strait?
- 31 Picture of Currents
- 32 Pictures
- 33 What Color is the are the Oceans
- 34 specific temperatures
I removed a question from the article: "what's the percipation?" This might have been a serious request for information on precipitation, so if anyone knows about precipitation on the Pacific and finds it interesting, there might be someone else who's interested. —JerryFriedman 00:28, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
What is the geographical coordinate of its southwestern limit with the Indian Ocean at the Strait of Malacca? (Please reply at talk:South China Sea. Thanks.) – Instantnood 19:24, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, this article doesn't even list the average depth of the Pacific Ocean. What's going on here? Isn't that kind of important? The Atlantic Ocean one has it. We can't let them beat us. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomasjjonesIII (talk • contribs) on 1 March 2006
- I started a Geography section and added this. Still needs bounds and other material from the lead added to flesh it out. --GregU 06:30, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
I realised both coastal pictures of this article were from the northeast Pacific (Western Coast of North America). I think it should be nice to include pictures of other locations, so I put a picture from Chile, to get the attention of the people who had this page onn their watchlists.
Anyone has pictures from the western side ?
(Maybe we should collect many pictures in the first place and then decide to put 4 o 5 considering the most representative views.) baloo_rch 02:53, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Please add a section on the names for the Pacific in other languages, and their English translations. Surely the Pacific Ocean had names before Magellan discovered it!--M@rēino 15:24, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Someone inserted the word "poopy" throughout the document, I tried to find all instances of it, and deleted them.
East vs. Eastern
The main article claims that the portion of the Pacific with west longitude (i.e., the part closest to the Americas) is "correctly" the West Pacific, and likewise the part with east longitude is "correctly" the East Pacific. In other words, if you sail west from the Americas, you will start in the West Pacific, cross the 180 meridian and so enter the East Pacific, still sailing west.
By whose authority is this considered "correct"? Does anyone actually use this blatantly confusing designation? This seems like yet another case of latching on to one particular aspect of a term, arbitrarily deciding that this aspect trumps everything else and declaring a particular interpretation "correct" in the face of actual usage to the contrary. If common usage is "incorrect", it's time to re-visit the notion of "correctness".
Here are some top Google hits showing east to be east and west to be west, as one might expect:
- The home page for East Pacific Surf Camp in Mazatlan, Mexico
- Wikipedia's own article on the East Pacific Rise, which lies in the "Eastern Pacific" – I wonder if that originally said "East Pacific" and was later "corrected" [Apparently not. And to be clear, "eastern" is also good. The important point is that "East Pacific" and "eastern Pacific" mean the same thing -Dmh 16:30, 1 September 2006 (UTC)].
- The UN Environment Programme's page on the North-East Pacific
- Soroptimist International of the South West Pacific
- The Friends World Committee for Consultation Asia West Pacific Section
- World Weather Info for the West Pacific
Here's a typical map from the US National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration. Other English-language weather services appear to use the same conventions:
In searching for this, I did not see a clear-cut single usage the other way. As far as I can tell, there is no real reason to designate the "east/west longitude" interpretation as "correct" in place of the intuitive one, which appears to be universally used. -Dmh
pandeism and hinduism
I don't think that the view you described on the Hinduism discussion page is a very conventional view. However, Hinduism is very liberal in allowing diverse ways of understanding God and other spiritual things, so your view would not necessarily conflict with core Hindu teachings. It would just be seen as one among many possible ways of understanding the Divine. HeBhagawan 04:45, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
The images on this page and Indian Ocean show the boundary between the oceans around Tasmania, which would put Melbourne in the Indian Ocean, not the Pacific Ocean as stated in the text of this article. Either the text or the diagrams are wrong - does anyone have a definitive answer as to where the two oceans meet? Orpheus 16:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the section on Marine pollution. It was general in nature and not specific to the Pacific ocean. - Ctbolt 08:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- To an extent yes, it was general, but the type of pollution noted was the type generally associated with waterways, including the Pacific. Further, the North Pacific Gyre, and the vortex of pollution are specific to the Pacific and therefore the section should remain. Sections should be improved, not removed as long as they're relevant to the article. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 09:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Integral map image necessary
Pertaining to map images of the pacific ocean.
Due to inaccurate canadian education there is an inconsistent perception of the relation in size of china to the united states.
They are obviously similar in size.
Canada has no relation to world book having managed to create this more accurate map image.
This following image from world book is more accurate.
- hor 18.104.22.168 17:32, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
An anonymous user (22.214.171.124) recently changed Ferdinand Magellan to Fernando Magalhães. This then broke the link to the article on Ferdinand Magellan and it has been undone by Vsmith. However, if this user comes back and reads this, thank you for your contribution but it is important that there is consistency in the English language version of Wikipedia, hence the rendering of the name in its English version. Before making similar changes, it is best to look at the links and the title of any article and use that name. You will note that the Portuguese name is listed in that article. All the best. --CloudSurfer 20:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Reinstate the Overview section (or expand the Lead section a bit)
A anonymous user vandalized this article on February 1 (see diff) removing the Overview section which contains some information not present in the current article. The vandalism was not corrected properly. Can somebody reinstate the Overview section? I'd do it but I'm not on a proper web browser right now to make the changes. Anyway, if no one does it before I get to use a proper browser, I'll reinstate it myself. --seav 10:18, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I reinstated the section. Hopefully someone can clean up. :-p --seav 14:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- So that's what was missing! Guess the stub Geography section I just added is now mostly redundant, though it does have a ref. --GregU 18:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, shame about that. I moved the ref and took out the redundant bits. Orpheus 19:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
The reference to this figure should probably be deleted until independent documentary evidence of his activities can be found. The only reference to Bune's being in the Pacific is other WP sites. See extensive discussion at --Nickm57 (talk) 23:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Deleted part of sentence " in that century Ragusan traders prevailed in Melanesia", as this is also part of the same fringe theory that Croatians discovered and traded in the Pacific before the Spanish, also discovered America etc. See the writings of Dr. A.Z.Lorvic/Z.Yoshamya.--Nickm57 (talk) 21:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Proposed oceans project
Good Afternoon, I would like to ask about the current pacific ocean and the effect on us for the years to come. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ceasar maximus (talk • contribs) 06:53, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
169.2 or 179.7?
Good point also just saw that there is a discrepancy. Frist thought that in the larger value maybe there are all islands included (new zealand, japan, parts of indonesia, etc). But this would not explan this great difference ! I will work on this !! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 22:45, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
I've heard many depths of the Mariana trench. Some say it is over 11,000 meteres deep other say it is much less. Is there a definitive answer or does no one know exactly? If there is a definitive answer, what is it!? AtheWeatherman (talk) 18:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
History and economy
This section is poor. What is the meaning of "independent states" and "Pacific"? Why are some countries arbitrarily excluded/included? Including the PRoC but excluding the RoC makes no sense; including Australia seems ridiculous as it borders the Indian, Pacific and Southern oceans; if PNG is in the Pacific, why is Indonesia not, nor Brunei or Malaysia? There are three sensible options: (a) to list every country wholly contained within the Pacific Ocean; (b) to list those countries within and bordering the Pacific Ocean; or (c) to scrap this list altogether. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 11:41, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
I chose to scrap the list and have revised this section to make it acceptable, however, I believe it is still incomplete and needs some expansion; I have marked it with the corresponding template message. – Dskluz (talk) 17:08, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
- Surface area of a body of water is not "worhtless", as it impacts both the rate of evaporation and the Earth's albedo. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
East, West and Central Pacific?
I wonder whether or not these should be inplemented into the article. They co-exist in the expansion of the Great Pacific as there is a South and North Pacific, that is mentioned in the article. The sub-categories of East, Central and West are utilized in geographical format, especially when referring to the hundreds of islands spread throughout the Pacific. Would anyone else feel that this is important enough to be added?
--User:RekonDog 11:58, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
The word tide isnt even mentioned once in the article...might it not be a good idea to at least link it somewhere? or even have a section for the tides in the pacific ocean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 15:26, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
This has me scratching my head: "The equator subdivides [the ocean] into the North Pacific Ocean and South Pacific Ocean, with two exceptions: the Galápagos and Gilbert Islands are deemed wholly within the South Pacific." 220.127.116.11 (talk) 06:01, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Surface Area Inconsistent
Original Name isn't Latin
- On the subject, article could use discussion of original naming. Official documents used "Southern Ocean" well into 19th century, although Wiki doesn't note that and instead has an article devoted to an imaginary Southern Ocean instead. Can anyone find a source on the various names in Spanish, English, & French (maybe also Chinese, though they might not have known of it as an ocean before getting Western maps) for the Pacific? -18.104.22.168 (talk) 16:29, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
there are lods of them 3
Is is worthwhile to mention also that the Pacific Ocean is also a regular dumping spot for lower stages of rockets, expendable experimental hypersonic vehicles, and deorbited sattelites, and other space vehicles? What about the potential impact of possible toxicity of certain components of those crafts to the marine environment? Life is short, but the years are long! (talk) 11:28, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Specification of Area.
The second paragraph opens with ..."At 169.2 million square kilometres (65.3 million square miles) in area," and then the first paragraph of the "Overview" section says "...having an area of 179.7 million square kilometres (69.4 million sq mi ..." they are both defining the area of the ocean, is there a border dispute, or are there two cited figures, and if so, shouldn't we state that fact ?
- It makes me wonder, too. And, most of all, there are no sources in both cases. Wizardist (talk) 23:34, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Dubious: 25,000 islands more than the rest of the world combined
Like many other pages, this one has been the location of vandalism. I removed it, 3/29/06 (2:57pm CST)
Straits or Strait?
The introductory paragraph states that the "Straits of Mollucca links ..." and the "Straits of Magellan links ...". The actual entries for these straits are under "Strait of" (singlular). The links specifically override this. It seems more consistent to say "Strait" instead of "Straits". Barring that, shouldn't it be "link" and not "links", or is "Straits" grammatically singular?
Picture of Currents
I would like to see a picture with arrows of the significant currents of the Pacific Ocean. The text description adequately describes it, but a picture is worth 1000 words.
I removed the picture of the Pacific Ocean from Oregeon, as it was the second pic of the ocean from North America. The removed link is shown below if anyone disagrees or can come up with a better way to display it that doesn't detract from the text. User:jayfogle 22:16 (UTC), 27 Aug 2006
What Color is the are the Oceans
Oceans come in a variety of colors, so you should really tell what color they are and why just in case someone wants to know. And if it is in the article, just tell me.
If I could get specific temperatures and precipitation for the north and west pacific seperately that would be great.