Talk:Antarctica

Semi-protected edit request on 19 August 2021

Remove “polar” from polar desert 2600:1006:B150:AC31:75F8:BD7E:FFD7:AEB3 (talk) 22:28, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Hello IP user, and thank you for your interest in contributing to Wikipedia! It would seem the term and associated page "polar desert" is a more accurate portrayal of the regions in Antarctica than simply "desert", which has the connotation of being sandy and hot. For this reason, I've not performed this request. Cheers! —Sirdog (talk) 22:42, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2021

Adimumba (talk) 06:35, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Please specify what change you are requesting be made. CMD (talk) 06:55, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Another Semi-protected Edit Request (minor edit)

In the "History of Exploration" section, 5th paragraph, this sentence seems to be missing a word:

In 1775, Cook called the existence a polar continent "probable" ....

I believe it should read "... existence *of* a polar ..."

Best Regards, Eclecticist32

 Done (CC) Tbhotch^™ 01:50, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

climate facts are confusing

Climate section says highest temperature recorded was in 1982 (19.8C) yet in climate change section there are two direct contradictions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D08:2D7D:A980:4997:16B4:5A58:E51C (talk) 18:53, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Indeed. I dug into the source and made a correction. According to the source the 1982 high was in Signey Island, considered Antarctica, but NOT "continental and surrounding islands" Antarctica. In the Climate Change section, it refers specifically to "continental" Antarctica. It's a weird distinction and maybe someone else could do a better job here. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 19:09, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Featured article review needed

An “FA review needed” notice from 21 November 2020 was archived without resolution that I can decipher. I inquired about the status in February. At WP:URFA/2020, the status has been marked as “Working” since February. @Femkemilene, FunkMonk, Wretchskull, Devonian Wombat, and Jo-Jo Eumerus: what is the status of the issues raised last November?

• There is MOS:SANDWICH
• user:Evad37/duplinks-alt reveals considerable duplicate wikilinks, but I imagine many of those can be justified in a dense technical article (they should be checked)
• What is this source (incomplete)? "Proposition de classement du rocher du débarquement dans le cadre des sites et monuments historiques" (in French). Antarctic Treaty Consultative meeting 2006, note 4.
• MOS:CURRENT, but cited to 2011 (There is no current economic activity in Antarctica outside of fishing off the coast and small-scale tourism.[1])
  • Why report this data from 14 years ago (unclear)? A total of 37,506 tourists visited during the 2006–07 Austral summer with nearly all of them coming from commercial ships; … Also, “a total of” is redundant … During the 2006–2007 Austral summer, 37,506 tourists visited Antarctica, with nearly all of the coming from …
  • Also cited to 2011 … anything newer? About 30 countries maintain about 70 research stations (40 year-round or permanent, and 30 summer-only) in Antarctica, with an approximate population of 4,000 in summer and 1,000 in winter.[1]
• There are tags (The illegal fishing of toothfish has been increasing, with estimates of 32,000 tonnes (35,000 short tons) in 2000.[172][173][needs update])
• Department of Redundancy Department … In 2007, the Polar Geospatial Center was founded. The Polar Geospatial Center uses geospatial and remote sensing technology to provide …
• A copyedit, WP:MOSNUM review, and check that all information is current is needed.
• Et al. Is it really necessary to chunk up the text with 60authors (120 parameters when counting first and last), and then display only five of them? That is quite a mess to work around in edit mode, and I wonder why et al can’t be used to just chop them to five. {{cite journal |last1=Fretwell|first1=P. |last2=Pritchard|first2= H. D. |last3=Vaughan|first3= D. G. |last4=Bamber|first4= J. L. |last5=Barrand|first5= N. E. |last6=Bell|first6= R. |last7=Bianchi|first7= C. |last8=Bingham|first8=R. G. |last9=Blankenship|first9= D. D. |last10=Casassa|first10= G. |last11=Catania|first11= G. |last12=Callens|first12= D. |last13=Conway|first13= H. |last14=Cook|first14= A. J. |last15=Corr|first15= H. F. J. |last16=Damaske|first16=D. |last17=Damm|first17= V. |last18=Ferraccioli|first18= F. |last19=Forsberg|first19= R. |last20=Fujita|first20= S. |last21=Gim|first21= Y. |last22=Gogineni|first22= P. |last23=Griggs|first23= J. A. |last24=Hindmarsh|first24=R. C. A. |last25=Holmlund|first25= P. |last26=Holt|first26= J. W. |last27=Jacobel|first27= R. W. |last28=Jenkins|first28= A. |last29=Jokat|first29= W. |last30=Jordan|first30= T. |last31=King|first31= E. C. |last32=Kohler|first32=J. |last33=Krabill|first33= W. |last34=Riger|first34= M. |last35=Langley|first35= K. A. |last36=Leitchenkov|first36= G. |last37=Leuschen|first37= C. |last38=Luyendyk|first38= B. P. |last39=Matsuoka|first39=K. |last40=Mouginot|first40= J. |last41=Nitsche|first41= F. O. |last42=Nogi|first42= Y. |last43=Nost|first43= O. A. |last44=Popov|first44= S. V. |last45=Rignot|first45= E. |last46=Rippin|first46= D. M. |last47=Rivera|first47=A. |last48=Roberts|first48= J. |last49=Ross|first49= N. |last50=Siegert|first50= M. J. |last51=Smith|first51= A. M. |last52=Steinhage|first52= D. |last53=Studinger|first53= M. |last54=Sun|first54= B. |last55=Tinto|first55=B. K.|last56=Welch|first56= B. C. |last57=Wilson|first57= D. |last58=Young|first58= D. A. |last59=Xiangbin|first59= C. |last60=Zirizzotti|first60= A. | display-authors = 5 |title=Bedmap2: improved ice bed, surface and thickness datasets for Antarctica |journal=The Cryosphere |volume=7 |issue=1 |page=390 | date = 28 February 2013|url=http://www.the-cryosphere.net/7/375/2013/tc-7-375-2013.pdf |access-date=6 January 2014|doi=10.5194/tc-7-375-2013 |bibcode=2013TCry....7..375F }}
• These are just some samples from a quick look. After all the work done, is anyone able to bring this article over the line, or shall it go to FAR?

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 09:16, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

My assessment was here:[1] Still some issues that have not been dealt with, and I don't have the time to fix them myself. FunkMonk (talk) 10:51, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

I am not sure if I can do much work here, but one thing I notice from the 2011 source is that the source itself does not seem to say that it's from 2011. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:52, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

I was planning to do some more work here, but with reduced energy due to long covid and other onwiki priorities, I wouldn't be surprised if that'll take another year. Won't be able to bring it back to FA level alone. Femke (talk) 12:06, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Femkemilene would you prefer I not initiate the FAR? Sometimes that gets things moving, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Don't wait for me, I have no idea how long I'll be recovering. With me editing 'parttime' compared to normal, this is very low priority. Would be great if somebody else takes over. Femke (talk) 20:36, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

I would start a FAR because then an editor might come forward - but I am not intending to improve the article and the FAR document says "Nominators are strongly encouraged to assist in the process of improvement". I cannot really see any disadvantage of starting a FAR. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:50, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Chidgk1 with the one-article-per-week limit, it could be a long time before this article is sent to FAR. If you are able to complete the notifications and do some follow-through as the FAR processes (things like pinging people for feedback, responding to what has been addressed and what has not, entering declarations and the like), that is sufficient per the "strongly encouraged". SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:56, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 December 2021

"The first women to set foot on Antarctica were Caroline Mikkelsen, who landed on an island of Antarctica in 1935,[47] and Ingrid Christensen who stepped onto the mainland in 1937" is probably contradicted by "The oldest known human remains in Antarctica was a skull that belonged to a young woman on Yamana Beach at the South Shetland Islands, which dates back to 1819 to 1825, who was likely part of a sealing expedition. She was found in 1985." , unless there were strong indications from the obduction that the body washed up on the beach. The fact that Ingred Christensen stepped the mainland first seems to hold up, but the rest of the paragraf should be removed imao. 2A02:908:675:9020:A01B:283C:AD2F:10B0 (talk) 20:54, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Maybe just "The first known women". (CC) Tbhotch^™ 21:24, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Or "the first confirmed evidence of..." Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 22:05, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done I've reworded here. Thanks IP! --Hemantha (talk)

Demonym

Here, it says the demonym is "Antarctic", but on the Demonym Wikipedia page, it is "Antarcticans". Awesomecat713 (talk) 03:11, 5 January 2022 (UTC)