Talk:Toba catastrophe theory
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Toba catastrophe theory article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Please supply full citations when adding information, and consider tagging or removing unciteable information.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Threads with no replies in 90 days may be automatically moved.|
|The content of Pleistocene human population bottleneck in Africa was merged into Toba catastrophe theory. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see ; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.|
Most studied super-eruption
I've tagged this declaration and moved it to the bottom of the lede section over concerns that it's a fairly trivial statement. It's probably obvious enough just looking at the vast number of refs and WP:ELs currently listed, and I can't even conceive of a List of super-volcano eruptions by amount of study article. At the same time, I suspect the supporting refs could be repurposed to say something more relevant and meaningful, so I didn't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.... -- Kendrick7talk 01:12, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
- There are articles where I could fill a whole Lancaster Bomber with these tags and happily drop them. Not the case here. I could possibly see how it may have been jarring in its original place, but if this eruption really is so important that the comment is true then I think it good to put it in the lede. Excessive detail would (exagerating to show the point) be: John Doe swam in the lake in 1949. If there are no further objections, I would like to remove the tag at the end of the month. Op47 (talk) 21:02, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Conflicting estimations of occurance
The first sentence says "occurred some time between 69,000 and 77,000 years ago". Then, in the next section the time frame is given as "The Toba eruption or Toba event occurred .... about 75000±900 years Before Present (BP)".
- I have now changed the intro to reflect the discussion in the sections "Supereruption" and "Volcanic winter and cooling". The dating "some time between 69,000 and 77,000 years ago" is unnecessary imprecise when there is now a consensus that the event occurred about 75,000 years ago. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 19:47, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
[Citation needed] tag on third paragraph should be removed.
The tag has been applied to this sentence:
>>Both the link and global winter theories are highly controversial
The discussion of the controversies presented in the body article, all properly cited, is evidence that the matters are controversial. No source could be more authoritative than that. In any case, the description is in the nature of a prelude to the material that follows rather than a claim of fact about the subject. It thus does not call for citation.
Twice it is stated (correctly) that the eruption did not significantly alter the climate of East Africa. So how in the world could it nearly wipe out humanity? The claim is heavily contested anyways. Bataaf van Oranje (talk) 17:44, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
the reference link http://toba.arch.ox.ac.uk/pub_files/Petraglia2007Science.pdf is host not found: Petraglia, M.; Korisettar, R.; Boivin, N.; Clarkson, C.; Ditchfield, P.; Jones, S.; Koshy, J.; Lahr, M.M.; Oppenheimer, C.; Pyle, D.; Roberts, R.; Schwenninger, J.-C.; Arnold, L.; White, K. (6 July 2007). "Middle Paleolithic Assemblages from the Indian Subcontinent Before and After the Toba Super-eruption" (PDF). Science. 317 (5834): 114–116. -- correct URL appears to be http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1141564 Teledyn (talk) 16:21, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Minor issue with reference to H. Florensis
Was just looking at the article after reading about new research conducted on H. Florensis which would suggest information in the Toba article is now inaccurate.
This article says that H. Florensis' survival after 50,000 YBP is now considered to be an open question. Newer research is finding a lack of H. Florensis fossils post-Toba.
Just asking if this needs to be updated or is there further clarifying information?