Talk:Ob

Rivers Top‑importance

	Geography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers 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.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Russia: Physical geography Top‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the physical geography of Russia task force.

Comment

I'm pretty sure that the Russian name for the river has a hard sign and not a soft sign.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.81.131.158 (talk • contribs) .

Sorry to disappoint you, but the soft sign is correct. There are no words in the Russian language that would end in a hard sign anymore.—Ëzhiki (Igel Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:55, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which ocean does the Ob river flow into?

The Arctic Ocean. - Sikon (talk) 09:57, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops....

Please disregard last question....sorry.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.140.80.250 (talk) 01:00, 24 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Confusing statements in articles

How can this river be both the fourth longest in Russia, and the fifth longest in the world?

The River article describes it as the fifth longest in the world, while this article describes it as the fourth longest in Russia. 216.195.199.146 (talk) 21:21, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I Luv the Ob River —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.173.213.201 (talk) 00:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

length

It is a mess with a length of Ob in the article. In the text there is 5,410km for Ob-Irtysh system, which seems to be conventional. But what is 2,962km in the description? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hatifnatter (talk • contribs) 11:10, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Ob/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

==Failure of Ob River for Wikipedia 0.7== I completely failed this article because it is an extremely short Start-class article of very little importance (the 4th longest river), and it can be compared to a non-important U.S. State Road. Also, the article really doesn't exert the importance of the subject, like what the river is used for (transportation, fishing, any wildlife preserves, etc.) It really is only of specialist interest, something we are not considering right now. Try waiting until we release 1.0 (which I doubt will include minor state roads or minor rivers), and then nominate it. Diez2 14:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 14:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 01:40, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Map Has an Error

That map appears to be wrong. The name Angara is placed on what appears to be actually the Nizhnyaya Tunguska (Lower Tunguska) River. 2601:441:4680:3230:5509:77C1:9891:16D9 (talk) 15:25, 24 March 2019 (UTC

Yes, I'm certain that's really the Lower Tunguska. My Oxford Atlas of the World calls it Nizhnyaya Tunguska. Also the river labeled "Anui" on this map is really the Alei according to [journal article]. 2601:441:4680:3230:5509:77C1:9891:16D9 (talk) 15:44, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just noticing this now - apologies for the error, and I'll fix it ASAP. Shannon [ Talk ] 04:21, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hiliarious fact contradiction

The article proudly states the Gulf is the longest estuary in the World.

The entire Thames estuary (as wide) is taken as part of its length. The Ob Gulf clearly is not as it is written. So either we need to state the Gulf is not considered part of its length by Russian geographers who do not mirror the practice of some other rivers (more politely); or we need to omit the fact; or we need to rewrite the length bit. With the Gulf the Ob, itself, is about 3,800 kilometres (2,400 mi).- Adam37 Talk 08:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed I stand guilty like most of the public in scanning a tiny bit and reading. But it is now much better than the secondary phrase "while the Ob is only 2,538 km (1,577 mi) long" which is just unhelpful. But still consider whether all consider the Gulf part of the Ob.- Adam37 Talk 08:09, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]