Jump to content

Talk:Loess Plateau

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Skhlaw (talk | contribs) at 10:02, 14 November 2021. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconChina Start‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles 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.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Loess Plateau pollen records

A google search of "Loess Plateru" and "pollen records" shows research that seems to suggest that the Loess Plateau was a grassland with frequent fires and never a heavy forest. I am not a scholar, does any one else have any knowledge or information? KAM 13:34, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check my own research but I can say off the top of my head that the Loess Plateau was at somewhat forested because a) the Shang graph for farming indicated that Shang agriculture (Which developed on the plateau) took place among trees and b) the common Non-Arboreal Pollen vs. Arboreal Pollen counts indicate, at least ituitively, that there were trees to compare to non-tree sources. Whether it was a "heavy" forest, I don't know, but will check. Elijahmeeks 13:45, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Formation: source of the dust

A recent programme in the BBC series How Earth Made Us fronted by Professor Iain Stewart stated that the dust that forms the loess came off the Himalayas ie the wind was blowing from west to east. Does anyone have a ref for this? The BBC prog is still availbale online here [1] for a while: the ref was in the Wind programme but I don't know if it can be cited.86.159.39.99 (talk) 14:47, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

map request

It would be nice if the article showed a small map of China indicating where the plateau is, in relation to the rest of the country. 69.111.193.46 (talk) 02:35, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's already done in effect by the present map, which even prominently shows Beijing (albeit spelled in the French Pekín) despite the plateau not reaching into neighbouring Hebei. Wikipedia is not a media outlet, and I would oppose any attempt to treat Chinese geography in the same manner most news sources do, as if either China were a monolith or all Wiki readers were completely ignorant of the PRC apart from the top 3 cities—you should be familiar with the absurd usage of distance from Beijing as a one-size-fits-all metric or maps showing even villages yet pretending provincial boundaries don't exist! GotR Talk 01:59, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Course project comment 1

Hi Christy,

I think you have illustrated all the main ideas clearly. However, in my opinion, listing the sources and the origins of loess are better to be done like what you have done in the tables i.e. to literally mark them with points (the * code). While you may consider simplifying the points in the tables with incomplete sentences.

I appreciate your diagrams, they are simple but useful to understand the ideas and is also artistic. However, it would be even better to add a satellite image to show its location in the introductory part.

One minor thing is that there is a large potential Wiki pages with keywords that you could link to. No offense but another issue is the occasional Chinese-style writing e.g. "If an area has gully erosion" → "If there is gully erosion in an area"/ "If an area suffers from gully erosion". Triton Chiu63 (talk) 08:50, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from Lawrence

I think you can try to use Geomapapp to outline the boundary of Loess Plateau and put it on the introduction part. I appricate with those 3D diagrams. Obviously you put great effort on it. One minor thing is that I think the table of geological development should follow the stratigraphic column (i.e. the oldest events at the bottom while the younger on top)