|Coast has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Science. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|WikiProject Geography||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
early unsigned message
hey guys if you're like me your lookin for examples well heres one Gulf Coast this is some of the states that it concludes of: mississippi, alabama, louisiana, and florida.
Lengths of coastline
Many pages describe how long the coast or border of a particular state or nation is. In light of the work done by Mandelbrot in his paper How Long Is the Coast of Britain? Statistical Self-Similarity and Fractional Dimension and the work done by Lewis Fry Richardson, I'm a little confused because it seems to me that stating a country's coast or border as being x kilometres means nothing unless it is specified how these things are measured and what scale of measurement is used. How is the standard the measurement done? For example, what does it mean when the CIA World Factbook states that certain country's coastline is a particular length? 22.214.171.124 05:30, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I would imagine that the CIA World Factbook would measure the coastlines (by satelite or whatever) in the standard units of measurements like kilometers or miles, having not noticed what units the figures are in I would presume that it is in the most common form of units D. BULL 12:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
There are many factors to be considered: is it measured at high water mark; do we measure up an estuary to the extent of the tide; are islands included; etc. Unless a person has a specialist need, maybe these things don't matter provided it is consistent for all countries. Then we have useful comparative information. In fact, there are standard techniques to estimate the distance - can someone explain them for us? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 08:10, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Hello friends. I got into this subject working on geography articles, which all state the "coastline" of political and geographic units. Now I have found out about Richardson. This information is very important and belongs in this article. If you look up "coastline" this is where you arrive. So, I am going to do a section and place it toward the end. No, I cannot tell you how the sources, including the CIA (and all countries) measure their coastlines. I doubt if there really are any precise universal techniques and I doubt if anyone serious is going to divulge this information to us. I would guess it has to do with analysis of aerial photography. But, we should say something about Richardson's discoveries; otherwise, one might think there is an absolute coastline out there waiting to be found. Don't no one delete the section please. You will have the option of moving or modifying it, but this information belongs in this article.Dave (talk) 10:55, 11 December 2008 (UTC) this is a load of BULLSHIT
types of coasts
In the types of coasts section i think theres an error. it says an emerging coastline is where theres relative sea level drop, and says its a result of isostatic rebound, and local subsidence.... these are not the same thing are they? isn't local subsidence the cause of a submerging coast?
Why on earth is there a link to Archipelago associated with Arch, which is etymologically distinct, morphologically unrelated, and in no way connected to cliff erosion? Tsunomaru 12:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Because somebody wasn't paying attention when they reformatted the list from its earlier incarnation. Joe D (t) 20:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
I believe shore and coast are different. I am studying the Coast at the moment. The shore is the edge of the see whereas the coast is more than just that including Spits, Bays, Headlands etc. MikkyGay (talk) 15:09, 07 June 2008 (GMT)
To define or not to define
I notice that the landforms section consists mainly of lists of articles. I would rather have used the main or details templates but one list has an extensive structure that would not be suitable for those templates. Nor can I say that I disagree with the lists. They probably will get longer as coastal geology and geography are big subjects. I notice however that in cliff erosion definitions are filled in and the mixture looks terrible. We either should or should not. I say we should take out the definitions, as they only repeat or should repeat the definitions in the articles, and just leave the list. Unless I hear some objections to the contrary I am going to do that before I leave this article, and I will be leaving it after I finish with the coastline statistic. Meanwhile, I hate to be doing professional-quality work on articles that say, look Dick look, see Jane run. So I am trying to upgrade the quality. One more point. Some intrepid and ambitious soul created dozens of stubs based on this article. Well, thank you for getting the stubs out there, but we need articles and not stubs and we have to get beyond the grade-school level of encyclopedia on this. How about some volunteers.Dave (talk) 17:28, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Removal of class="references-small"
In revisiting this problem I noticed the text has been corrupted. No one is seeking to measure an infinite coast. If you seek to measure it, you assume it is NOT infinite! Consequently the section acquired a couple tags, naturally, as it now is confusing. I will fix that. Let me say this. Thank you for your concern to make sure WP articles are accurate. I would suggest that, unless you know the topic, or can find out, and are willing to do the lookups, don't alter the text. Thank you.Branigan 15:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
All right, this is a much different situation. As I looked for a ref I discovered "Coastal Zone Management" with stated author Parmal Sharma, published in 2009. Guess what? I found our entire original section written by me in 2008 lifted word for word. Moreover, Parimal has copyrighted this book as though it were his. Additionally, someone - possibly him - has requested a reference on my wording! If I give his book as a reference it looks as though I stole his text! Moreover, since I had no copyright and neither does WP, he can insist the passage be taken out. That is in effect a transfer of authorship and ownership from us to him! I wrote it but he is now the author. I gave it up the moment I pressed "save" but he now takes it for his own from WP. This is absurd. I'm not going to rewrite my stuff because he copyrighted it. WP warns us against this eventuality but up until now I have not seen much of it. I did notice Google started doing this. but they attributed the text to WP. Sharma's not attributing, he's taking, and as far as I can see, getting away with it. That may not be all right with me. I'm taking out the request for a citation. The meaning is clear, it needs no citation. Also, there was a request to clarify "Infinity." This is a bogus request, everyone knows what infinity is. I'm not playing along with Sharma's appropriation. In fact I think I have reached my limit of toleration here. I have been a WP editor, and I enjoyed that to a large degree, but I think this is further than I am willing to go. I don't know if there is an answer to this problem. Let me think, but meanwhile, the point of diminishing returns has definitely been reached. No hard feelings. The experiment was probably worth a try.Branigan 16:15, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
New NEWS today, for future editing
The new disaster film, 'San Andreas', has put the major Californian fault in the spotlight.
Headline-1: It's not just San Andreas: Scientists reveal the hidden hazards that could trigger huge quakes and tsunamis off Californian coast
QUOTE: "The new disaster film, 'San Andreas', has put the major Californian fault in the spotlight. But a new study has found it isn't just the San Andreas fault we should be worried about; a very real threat of earthquakes and tsunamis lurks offshore Southern California. Researchers say that several long faults could cause magnitude 8.0 quakes and tsunamis within 90 miles (145km) of the coast." -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 11:25, 30 May 2015 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for future editing.
- Study looked at structure of two large seafloor faults in the Borderland
- They found the Santa Cruz-Catalina Ridge Fault has been lifted upward
- It is also slipping sideways like the plates along the San Andreas Fault
- Could cause 8.0 quakes and tsunamis within 90 miles (145km) of coast