Talk:North Sea: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Featured Article candidate yet?
→‎Featured Article candidate yet?: things that still need doing
Line 97: Line 97:
==Featured Article candidate yet?==
==Featured Article candidate yet?==
I'd hate to put any article through the process, but this does look like a featurable article to me, at least. Hats off to all of you. --[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] 23:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I'd hate to put any article through the process, but this does look like a featurable article to me, at least. Hats off to all of you. --[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] 23:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
:Not quite yet, I feel. i've given the article a quick gander and there are still a few problems:
*Several spelling mistakes, typos and some clumsy english in places, but this is easily solved.
*some irrelevance and imbalance. For instance, the Battle of Trafalgar (which wasn't in the North Sea) is mentioned, but the Battle of Copenhagen (which was - just) isn't. Also, the map of the Amber Road isn't relevant, as it is only tangential to the North Sea. The Amber Road has its own article where the map can go.
*Despite the large number of citations (and isn't ''that'' a pleasure to see for once), there needs to be a few more, especially for the part about the moving islands, which is quite a claim and needs a proper reference.
*Sections on culture and wildlife are missing.
*Some of the redlinks need to be filled.
*It's now 88K, which goes against the [[WP:SIZE]] guidelines. But at least it's finally bigger than [[Loch Ness Monster]] which somebody was moaning about.
*there are probably things that I've missed.

:But having said that, it's great to see how much this article has come on. It's the first time I've been involved in an improvement drive and it's been a pleasure watching (and helping) this article grow. [[User:Totnesmartin|Totnesmartin]] 11:09, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:09, 28 July 2007

Template:ACIDcur/article

A quick check of the Oxford English Dictionary shows that North Sea was in use by the 13th century, and in common use in the 18th. German Sea and German Ocean were in play, but were never the exclusive English term simply displaced by war-fervor. The usages in the OED implies that "German Ocean" is more a learned term (as a translation of Ptolemy's Germanikos Okeanos) and that "North Sea" may be more common, but I may be misreding the usages. --MichaelTinkler

I agree. I started to write a long list of supporting evidence, then found this article which sums it up nicely. In reality the North Sea had not been called the German Sea or German Ocean in everyday English speech for centuries prior to World War I. One question which remains is whether there was an archaic "official" name that was changed to reflect the ordinary name during the War. However, the first body providing "official" British usage for place names outside the United Kingdom proper was the PCGN, which was not founded until 1919. Thus, the claim appears to be an urban legend. I'll leave the claim for a day or so to see if anyone can come up with supporting evidence, then remove it. --Roger 13:40, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)

If the Kattegat is a bay of the North Sea, and Sweden borders on the Kattegat, then why doesn't Sweden border on the North Sea?--user:Branko


From a Danish/Swedish point of view, it is doubtful whether the Kattegat is a part of the North Sea. But the precise delimination of the Northern waters is controversial.
S.


The German Hydrographic Service used to define the Kattegat as part of the "waters between North Sea and Baltic Sea" (along with Sound & Belts and maybe even Kiel bay). I am not sure whether this terminology is still used. Kosebamse 11:03 Feb 28, 2003 (UTC)

Need help with reference article

This is a nice overview article about the geography and hydrography of the North Sea, apparently published by OSPAR Commission. It presents as "Chapter 2" but I was unable to find other parts of that publication. Any ideas? Kosebamse 04:08, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The last digit of the address is the number of the chapter. Try this for the introduction. (RJP 20:33, 21 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Headline text

hi k 'lfa lzd'đInsert: Á á É é Í í Ó ó Ú ú À à È è Ì ì Ò ò Ù ù  â Ê ê Î î Ô ô Û û Ä ä Ë ë Ï ï Ö ö Ü ü ß Ã ã Ñ ñ Õ õ Ç ç Ģ ģ Ķ ķ Ļ ļ Ņ ņ Ŗ ŗ Ş ş Ţ ţ Ć ć Ĺ ĺ Ń ń Ŕ ŕ Ś ś Ý ý Ź ź Đ đ Ů ů Č č Ď ď Ľ ľ Ň ň Ř ř Š š Ť ť Ž ž Ǎ ǎ Ě ě Ǐ ǐ Ǒ ǒ Ǔ ǔ Ā ā Ē ē Ī ī Ō ō Ū ū ǖ ǘ ǚ ǜ Ĉ ĉ Ĝ ĝ Ĥ ĥ Ĵ ĵ Ŝ ŝ Ŵ ŵ Ŷ ŷ Ă ă Ğ ğ Ŭ ŭ Ċ ċ Ė ė Ġ ġ İ ı Ż ż Ą ą Ę ę Į į Ų ų Ł ł Ő ő Ű ű Ŀ ŀ Ħ ħ Ð ð Þ þ Œ œ Æ æ Ø ø Å å – — … [] [[]] {{}} ~ | ° ± − × ² ³ € Ò hfr ;f;

x

Hello - can someone explain what the above piece of text under "Headline Text" is for? IanB 12:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, speaking both German and English I may be able to enlighten everyone as to what use the above list may be. When referencing German words(other non-English languages also) it requires a lot of diacritic marks. To open a character map page or searching for an ASCII number every time is tedious, thus the list above allows for a quick copy and paste when a specific character is required. I may be wrong, but it seems quite useful to me. Pmi25 05:23, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Bad Description

MSN Encarta gives a better image and description:

http://encarta.msn.com/map_701515192/North_Sea.html

Expand notice

This is a major body of water, so I've nominated it for Version 0.5, but the article is very brief. Could someone try to add some content? Compare Baltic Sea. Thanks, Walkerma 04:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could I suggest the history section should reflect its importance in WW1 and WW2? Should there be a section on shipwrecks (including archaeology), of which the UK coastline alone has many tens of thousands. The Baltic Sea section on Geography is excellent ..but less applicable here as the boundaries can't be rigourously defined. In the absence of a geography section, could the introduction cover sea temperatures, significant wave height, icing etc? JRPG 12:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Other north seas

Are there any other bodies of water known as 'north sea' or some translation thereof? If so, even if they're not internationally-recognised names, it might be worth linking to them, to help reduce systemic bias. (Not that I know of any myself, but it's the kind of generic name that must surely be found all over the place...) Chris Thornett 16:24, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

Does this article not need more citations? Antgel 02:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

map

that map's really bad. the link to the encarta thing that other guy posted has a wonderful map.

Expand

Does any German speaking person intend to fulfill the translation request anytime soon? I wish I could do it. But I was thinking of just using some English reference material that we can find on our own to expand this article. I might propose a list of good sources and then anyone else interested in the article is welcome to work with me. ΞΞΞ 18:05, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yes i am working on translating this article from the German along with Island Kayaker. Jieagles 00:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone have a look at the non-English word 'Kontors'. Its translation is office which seems inappropriate for the context. Would outpost be better? JRPG 12:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kontor has an article in English wikipedia. i have now fixed the link. Jieagles 19:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Sudden flood'

Couldn't figure out if this is there already. [1] Anchoress 20:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is another source based on the same report in Breach of ice age lake made Britain an island, Guardian Thurs 19th July which may help?— Rod talk 09:13, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger Question

Can / should this translation Island Kayaker/North Sea from German Wiki be merged into the current article to help with the Article Improvement Drive? I have referenced some sources into the article.... I started some merging of the two articles, while looking up resources about the various chapters simultaneously, for a few sections.... SriMesh | talk 03:39, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Articles with unsourced statements since July 2007 | All articles with unsourced statements

Can these templates be removed? Have been adding sources and references. Are they enough? How is the template acknowledged and discussed?SriMesh | talk 04:06, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fact and Reference Check#North Sea - Thank you. SriMesh | talk 17:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article candidate yet?

I'd hate to put any article through the process, but this does look like a featurable article to me, at least. Hats off to all of you. --Wetman 23:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite yet, I feel. i've given the article a quick gander and there are still a few problems:
  • Several spelling mistakes, typos and some clumsy english in places, but this is easily solved.
  • some irrelevance and imbalance. For instance, the Battle of Trafalgar (which wasn't in the North Sea) is mentioned, but the Battle of Copenhagen (which was - just) isn't. Also, the map of the Amber Road isn't relevant, as it is only tangential to the North Sea. The Amber Road has its own article where the map can go.
  • Despite the large number of citations (and isn't that a pleasure to see for once), there needs to be a few more, especially for the part about the moving islands, which is quite a claim and needs a proper reference.
  • Sections on culture and wildlife are missing.
  • Some of the redlinks need to be filled.
  • It's now 88K, which goes against the WP:SIZE guidelines. But at least it's finally bigger than Loch Ness Monster which somebody was moaning about.
  • there are probably things that I've missed.
But having said that, it's great to see how much this article has come on. It's the first time I've been involved in an improvement drive and it's been a pleasure watching (and helping) this article grow. Totnesmartin 11:09, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]