Talk:Pine Island Glacier

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pine Island Glacier/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

1. Fair representation without bias:

2. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

3. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   None provided.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   None Provided.

4. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

There were some formatting errors, but I think the article is overall a very good article. ceranthor 22:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Your last sentence in the acceleration section. It would seem that this question can be explored more by describing the acceleration observed. Polargeo I encourage you to do so. That is where is acceleration greatest, is it propogating. This will help indicate whether it is a calving front-ice shelf or upstream induced phenomenon. I did the bathymetry for the Polar Freeze journey for T.Kellogg and T.Hughes.

2010 Katz model

The paper just published in Proc royal soc does not really support any of the media hype. it is the testing of a fairly basic mathematical model on grounding line stability which just adds a peripheral Pine Island Glacier(ish) study. A quote from the paper if you are unconvinced "Given the complex, three-dimensional nature of the real Pine Island glacier, with its convergent feeder streams and subglacial hydrology, it should be clear that the above model is a very crude representation of reality" from the paper "Stability of ice-sheet grounding lines" Katz and Worster 2010. Polargeo (talk) 06:53, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

File:PineIslandBay.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:PineIslandBay.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:13, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

National Geographic resource

• January 2012 in-print issue, page 34 & 35 Antarctic Undercut by Douglas Fox. 97.87.29.188 (talk) 01:32, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Further Reading addition from Skeptic (U.S. magazine)?

• Cover Story How We Know Global Warming is Real and Human Caused in current Volume 17 Number 2 Skeptic (U.S. magazine). Cover photo: A massive crack across Antarctica’s Pine Island Glacier will produce a giant iceberg of about 350 sq. miles (900 square k). Credit: NASA/ GSFC/METI/ERSDAC/JAROS, and U.S./Japan ASTER Science Team. 99.181.140.167 (talk) 09:02, 29 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.181.141.90 (talk)

Article link included above, with photo 99.181.136.208 (talk) 07:47, 1 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.181.143.181 (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.181.140.176 (talk)