Talk:Antarctica/Archive 1

message: The map appears to be from National Geographic magazine. I'm pretty sure that magazine has a copyright policy. Can someone verify or refute this? (And remove the map if necessary.) --Eitheladar 06:20, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyrighted map? 

message: This is bad grammar. An outpost of something is a small area offset from the larger, named area. Guam is an outpost of the United States. Any outposts of Antarctica would have to be established elsewhere by Antarctic citizens. I'm thinking of moving the category to Outposts in Antarctica. --Yath 07:07, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outposts of Antarctica 

message: I just created a page for this, but don't really know whether it's already listed on Antarctica under another name... if somebody can help... Rhymeless | (Methyl Remiss) 10:32, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Little America]]

message: I wonder if someone was to ask you "May I have the time, please?" What would you say? Maybe this is a stupid question but, what's the time zone for Antartica? How's time being calcualted down there? --Garlics82 19:52, Nov 19, 2004 (UTC)
:So far as the Australian stations go:
:*Macquarie Island works off Tasmanian time, AEST (GMT+10) or AEDT (GMT+11).
:*Casey is 2 hours behind - (GMT+8)
:*Davis is 3 hours behind - (GMT+7)
:*Mawson is 4 hours behind - (GMT+6)
:See .  I'll integrate this into the article. -- Chuq 01:12, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Officially, it's GMT, although McMurdo Station uses Christchurch, NZ time. -- Dave Cohoe 06:37, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time Zone 

message: An automated Wikipedia link suggester has some possible wiki link suggestions for the Antarctica article, and they have been placed on this page for your convenience.Tip: Some people find it helpful if these suggestions are shown on this talk page, rather than on another page. To do this, just add  to this page. — LinkBot 09:56, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[User:LinkBot/suggestions/Antarctica|Link suggestions]] 

message: At some point I saw a picture on Wikipedia (or maybe the Commons) of a mountain in Antarctica, and a field of bluish ice in the forground. The caption explained somethign about how the ice was blue from layers melting and refreezing, I believe. I have searched like CRAZY but I can't find the image again. Anyone know what I'm talking about? --Brian Z 04:57, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like :Image:Lake_Fryxell.jpg I reckon. Worldtraveller 00:29, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  (William M. Connolley 09:23, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: Image:Lake_Fryxell.jpg was the one! Thanks so much Worldtraveller!. --Brian Z 04:30, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Picture 

message: Why is an altered version of the Lake Fryxell picture used?  The original (http://photolibrary.usap.gov/AntarcticaLibrary/LAKEFRYXELL.JPG) shows a lovely sky with a few small clouds, while the altered version puts a larger expanse of obviously fake-looking digital blue sky gradient over everything.  Based on my technical expertise as a reader of a Kim Stanley Robinson novel, I get the impression that little clouds are important down there, or at least, I think they make for a nicer picture. Would you agree? Mike Serfas 18:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Altered Picture 

message: This article does not mention the size of Antarctica (surface area, km²). — Timwi 19:08, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, found it on de :-) — Timwi 19:14, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Area? 

message: Does the South Shetland page need its own Educative Links section?  How is this different than the other external links, which appear to be educational as well? -- Dave C. 19:56, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: So, is it possible for two young navigators to claim the slice between 90 degrees and 150?
: Can you donate some of your pictures of Antarctica to WP?  We need more pictures of ice.  Oh, and some snow too. (SEWilco 15:36, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No, you cannot, it must be a country that has dne something important there. ive been there (Argentinian Air force gave a little help) it is completely unusable and far from all countries (far from both Australia and South America) Argentino 11:55, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

text: DoM also claims a large section of Antarctica. None of these claims is recognized by any established government.Insert non-formatted text here
I, Nachomania, wish to claim 1000 acres of Antarctica, maily for camping/exploration/barbeques. The land will be owned by Canada, with me as its premier, and probable sole resident. Just want to make sure everyone knows. Ok? :) I wish! Also, I wish about the barbeque. I'll be in my backyard...anyways, you probably couldn't, becuase you're not a country, and, if you were, I don't think it would go to well in the world today. Land claims are more...BNA era at the latest, really. Ooh! Triangle character!Δ! I hope that answers your question! User:Nachomania 19:24, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can I claim Antartica? 

message: Why isn't there a section in the article about the history of the continent throughout pre-historic times? It has not always been Earth's freezer.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.33.111.21 (talk • contribs) 13:15, 17 July 2005.
* Thank you for your suggestion regarding : regarding :! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to…) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. (SEWilco 03:12, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Prehistoric Antarctica

message: Quoting from Washington Post article about Melchisedek:
"Melchizidek has leaders, laws, religion, a flag, a disputed homeland and
an unreasonable territorial claim -- the textbook definition of your basic
nation-state. Who's to say it's phony?"  Unsigned by 68.121.47.161 As a courtesy to other editors, it is a Wikipedia guideline to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, and WikiProject pages. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will be then be automatically added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). For further info, read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thank you.
:En.wikipedia.org does; this isn't the article to contest its status. El_C 02:07, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I was looking for an article.  Nothing much on the web, and nothing on the CIA's World Fact Book. :) -- Dave C. 05:08, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Nice work on Frank Zappa, I'm a big fan. Hugely underestimated guitarplayer, very fond of the instrumentals esp. (treacherous cretins).  :) El_C 05:16, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Melchisedek claim 

message: Hakusa - Wiki addict: 19:49, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: For most of it, no. Most of antarctica is sufficiently cold (see pix, Climate_of_Antarctica) that a small rise in T won't make it melt. In fact the prediction is that increased snowfall (warmer air -> more moisture -> more snow) outweights the melt, for the next 100 years. Apart from surprises. Only the antarctic peninsula is melting: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=146. Dunno about the animals: I'm not a bio. William M. Connolley 20:08, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I'm sure the definition of "more animals than it can hold" is awkward.  I wonder how it is predicted that animals which currently live on rock and ice would be affected by having more rock.  Even if grass appears I don't expect sheep and coyotes to quickly affect Antarctic animals.  (SEWilco 20:18, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't it melting? 

message: Antarctica has no official flag. Its probably impossible to have one, since it isn't a nation state. Putting a flag on the ant page, with the title "flag of antarctica", is misleading (only if you click on the link do you get told, there is no flag). Why is there any reason to put this flag on the page? William M. Connolley 19:53, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is better to delete it. Argentino 21:35, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Looks like someone wanted to use a country template to summarize some info about the region.  The flag can be mentioned in the text.  (SEWilco 20:45, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The flag 

message: The first sighting of Terra Australis was made by Captian James Cook in his first voyage(1768-1771). His mission was to discover the great southern land(Terra Australis) and he did so by discovering Australia. He called what he discovred Terra Australis Incognita this is where we get the word Australia from. His first actual sighting of Antartica was during his second voyage(1772-1775). He quickly added Antartica to Terra Australis Icongnita after this sighting. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aussiebludgerned (talk • contribs).
I dont remember the story that way. i cant remember, however, where in this encyclopedia (it is so much divided in sections!) i read that Cook had seen dust upon icebergs and had deduced that there was land, so i went to the Argentine National Library, near my house and find in a book about cook, written by a guy "Longheatr" the same fact. I realy dont know what to beelive Argentino 19:11, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Just report what the book says and create a citation (title, author, publisher, year) for the book for verifiability of the fact.  If the library's catalog is not online you might have to visit the library again to get the information.  Fill in the blanks in a  entry and it will be formatted for you (see the template's Discussion page for documentation).  (SEWilco 21:21, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  yea, because i live to work for free for the encyclopedia, you know, maybe none of you dont work/study, but I do. The next time i go to the library i'll do it. Argentino 12:15, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terra Australis? 

message: ===>Always wondered this... How much of Antarctica's surface actually contains land underneath? That is to say, what percentage of it is not simply an ice shelf? Justin (koavf) 00:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The vast majority of Antarctica contains land beneath the ice, and there are even some areas McMurdo Dry Valleys with exposed land.  The major ice shelves are Ross Ice Shelf, and Ronne Ice Shelf, with numerous smaller ice shelves flanking the coasts.  A specific percentage? I don't know, but in 2001, the National Geographic produced the best map of Antarctica (satellite image-based) that I know of, in conjunction with the Byrd Polar Research Center .  Sorry, it's a commercial link for buying the map, but you can view it/zoom in by clicking on "More Views". It shows where these ice shelves are and how large, in relation to the continent. -Aude (talk | contribs) 00:43, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

text: To expand on that a bit... some of the Antarctic land underneath the ice is actually below sea level. See http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/aedc/bedmap/examples/bed10.gif and http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/aedc/bedmap/. William M. Connolley 11:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A question about Antarctic land 

message: I've added a todo table at the top of this page. Feel free to add or remove things. Gflores Talk 01:17, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You did such a good job, I'm not sure I can add anything! Maurreen 03:49, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Todo 

message: Does the layout look bad for anyone else? Do you see trapped white space? Maurreen 03:49, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you talking about the order of the sections or the placement of images and such? Also, what do you mean by "trapped white space"? Gflores Talk 03:58, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I mean, on my screen, there are sections where the images or text trap a blank area -- an empty chunk of white space. That's the only problem I see, but it might be my browser. Maurreen 04:14, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Appearance

message: Under economy:
:"The environmental protection act that was added to the Antarctic Treaty prevents such struggle for resources. In 1998, a compromise agreement was reached to add a 50-year ban on mining until the year 2048, further preventing any economic system from taking place. The primary agricultural activity is the capture and offshore trading of fish."
#I made "Environmental" lowercase to match "protection act", but I'm not sure whether they should be capitalized.
#Instead of "...further preventing any economic system from taking place," would it be better to say something like "...further preventing limiting economic development and exploitation"?
:Maurreen 04:14, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. Thanks for proofreading. Gflores Talk 07:10, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Couple questions

message: Does anyone else have a weird layout with the images, specifically in the flora/fauna section. image, that's how it looks to me. Of course, it could be just my resolution. Gflores Talk 19:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The layout looks good to me. Maurreen 19:01, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: layout

message: I think that this article needs such a section to be truly comprehensive.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:30, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Antarctica in fiction/popular culture

message: This article covers the Antarctic Continent alone, while in the English language 'Antarctica' refers both to the mainland and the wider geographical region comprising also the islands and waters situated south of the Antarctic Convergence.  (See  Livingston Island for further details.)  So the article should probably cover the rest of Antarctica as well.  Apcbg 22:20, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Geographical scope of Antarctica

message: Does Antarctica have a Currency? If so, is it worth mentioning in the 'Economy' section?
Liam Plested 01:47, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Each base may or may not use its national currency William M. Connolley 14:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

text: There is a currency called Antarctican dollar, but is created by a private company. I don't think it's used in Antarctica. Just a fun thing for bill collectors. --Apoc2400 06:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Currency 

message: I removed, and Gflores reverted back in, the stuff about who-was-born-first. I argue that:
* this is all tedious politics
* its out of place: there is an article about demographics; if it belongs anywhere, its there
William M. Connolley 14:58, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's an interesting fact as it's the only continent in which we know who was the first person born there. It's not controversial or untasteful as you say. However, I do see it being a little long now, so maybe a good compromise is to still mention it but shorten it, so there isn't two whole paragraphs on 2 births. What do you think? Gflores Talk 18:43, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Its all wrapped up in politics. The baby was imported to be born there for (completely pointless) policitcal ends; hence the "distasteful" bit (and the recent additions don't help...). I would rather it were out. But, AFAIK its a true factoid. Are we also going to include the first person to die there? :-) William M. Connolley 19:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The paragraph on the (historical) population of South Georgia is hardly politics in the sense you mean; the sealers and whalers were sent by no government but rather pursued their normal industry.  Some of them used to live there for several decades (albeit none for more than one generation), some enjoyed normal family life with marriages, divorces, and children born and raised.  Incidentally, I have met one such born and bred native South Georgian: Mrs. Jan Cheek of Stanley, until recently a Falkland Islands Councillor.  As for the first persons to die in Antarctica, the earliest recorded grave is that of the sealer Frank Gabriel who died on 14 October 1820 on South Georgia, while the first people known to have died in Antarctica were most probably the 644 Spanish seamen and soldiers onboard the San Telmo believed wrecked off Livingston Island in September 1819. (The latter were sent by their government indeed, even if to fight colonial rebels in the Viceroyalty of Peru rather than conquer Antarctica.) Apcbg 22:36, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population 

message: Do correct me if I'm wrong, I don't think Antarctica has an official flag, the one with the UN blue shown is the proposed one. Should we include the flag here, or perhaps add a note to the side of the side noting it as only a proposition?  --Shibo77 14:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag of Antarctica? 

message: I only thought of this while admonishing another user for doing something similar, but is it notable for this article that some Flat Earthers do not believe that Antartica exists. Perhaps a note in the geography section? savidan(talk) (e@) 01:43, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a bad idea. GfloresTalk 02:01, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a source for that? According to the Flat Earth article, the non-existence of Antarctica and/or the antipodes may have been a belief of some in the middle ages, although that claim is disputed. But in modern times there is no evidence anyone holds the belief that Antarctica doesn't exist. According to that article, there probably aren't even any Flat Earthers any more, since their association's founder died in 2001 they have not been around. Derek Balsam 03:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flat earth viewpoint 

message: Is it just me or does anyone else think the image in the lead section throws off the layout and makes it seem jumbled? It's been added and removed before, so I'd just like some input from other users with different monitor resolutions. GfloresTalk 02:01, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Image in lead

message: It was about to remove this section and its link in 'See also'. It does however appear that there is some notability to this claim. The map is called the Piri Reis map and the author of a book on the subject was Charles Hapgood. As the map article says: "Many scholars, however, dispute this conclusion, citing the fact that for centuries cartographers had been depicting a southern landmass on global maps based on the theoretical assumption that one must exist." If anything, this section could be subsumed into the Exploration section, but it doesn't deserve a section of its own (and not where it has been placed and formatted). --BillC 07:52, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Did it myself, and someone else removed the inappropriate Amazon link. --BillC 09:32, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early 1513 AD Map 

message: 3rd para. "seven countries (Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, India, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom) maintain territorial claims." Should it say 8, or should one of these not be in the list? Nurg 09:11, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone just added India a few minutes ago.  It was reverted because no claims were cited, so 7 is most likely correct. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 09:14, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: No of countries with claims

message: All of the measurements seem to be given in Metric, alienating Americans. This should be remedied. R'son-W 10:14, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As a matter of fact that Antarctic supply ship is the Vanguardia, Uruguayan Navy. Apcbg 09:21, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: Some of the recent news needs to be incorporated into the article. 
*Under-Ice Lakes in Antarctica Linked by Buried Channels
*Antarctica's Atmosphere Warming Dramatically, Study Finds
:-71.96.234.140 05:08, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent news

message: This was a WP:FAR concern. Can we source that? Marskell 21:20, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The whole thing is covered with a ~3 km ice sheet.  Just look at topo map.    The Himalayas and isolated peaks in other places are higher, but on a continental scale there is nothing even competing with the average height of Antarctica.  Dragons flight 21:32, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great. As WP:V (more or less) says: the obvious should be sourced too. So throw a topo map down here maybe. Marskell 21:41, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

text: OK, I threw the ref in quickly. Marskell 21:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Highest" 

message: Antactica can get below -80C.
Dry Ice forms at -78.5C.
So maybe CO2 can be turned to dry ice in an Antarctic winter?
What are the implications?
:... for natural processes already in place ... if they exist ... if they stop?
:... for human processes encouraging CO2 removal ... is there a way?  Perhaps it is a silly idea anyway ... it could melt as a large mass and dump co2 into the atmosphere.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.217.82.240 (talk) 02:12, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Dry Ice, -78.5C and Global Warming

message: On the Drake Passage page it says that the passage was opened 41Mya in the late Eocene - "^ Helen Briggs. "Fossil gives clue to big chill", BBC News, 21 April 2006. Retrieved on 2007-11-01. " The Antartica page puts it at 25Mya. Can we get some agreement on this? Batmo (talk) 19:21, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the currency of the base's home country is generally used at each base. For instance, McMurdo Station uses US currency despite being within New Zealand's Ross Dependency. So New Zealanders passing through McMurdo Station on the way to Scott Base have been advised to purchase US dollars for any purchases they need to make there, despite theoretically still being in New Zealand territory. -- Avenue (talk) 01:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Drake Passage?

message: I recall reading that if it were not for the ice cap Antarctica would be two continents and not one. If this is true, then it should be noted. Can't find a reputable source though. Anyone know? 
4.142.45.181 06:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a diagram showing Antarctica without the ice cap in the Geology section. The peninsula area and much of Wilkes Land becomes an archipelago, and the rest is a continent of sorts. I'm not sure if that counts as two continents or not.--Efil's god 12:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Two Continents?

message: It's not accurate to list the Antarctic Treaty Secretariat as the government or even the de facto government of Antarctica, although it certainly plays a role in managing the continent. 
The secretariat is an administrative office, set up by the dozens of governments that get together annually to make decisions under their Antarctic Treaty about governing the continent. They set up the secretariat to implement their consensus decisions, and they decide what the secretariat does - it doesn't govern in its own right. It would be better to refer to Antarctic Treaty Parties or the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting as playing the role of government.
:You are right, and your suggested wording seems adequate. Apcbg 07:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Government & international cooperation 

message: Considering they were the ones that found it.
-G
Perhaps it's because Antarctica is inhabitable and you would have to travel across the entire indian to get there.
68.49.1.207 16:06, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why doesn't Russia claim it?

message: I just took the paragraph below out of the article. Not a chance it's true...it is, however, mildly amusing. --Aelffin 16:47, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bumbershoot 

message: Watch out for Vandalism there was alot the last 2 weeks, that is why i made a revert. The Green Fish 09:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: I saw an "Antartica RC" rugby kit. Is this a joke, or do they actually have a sanctioned (or unsanctioned) side? It might be interesting to note. - Plasticbadge 02:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sport? 

message: I heard that in the 30's there was a nazi expedition to Antarctica in which they claimed it for themselves. This true? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.92.168.168 (talk • contribs).
:lol, and the significance of Antartica to Germany would have been? The asnwer is no.
:-G —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.117.157.66 (talk • contribs).
::Yes, it is true.  See New Swabia. lolx0rz. TomTheHand 18:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nazis? 

message: Under flora, fungus is not mentioned. However, this is scientifically inaccurate. My suggestion:
#Find more information on the fungus of Antarctica.
#Create a new subsection under "Flora and fauna" for fungi.
#Rename the section to "Biota", "Organisms", etc. --Gray PorpoisePhocoenidae, not Delphinidae 01:16, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably too much. I wonder, since there've been quite a lot of an animals and plants discovered lately (including new species), if there could be a link to a new site showing some of this stuff off. Brian Pearson 23:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flora and fauna 

message: There seems to be a few too many pictures in this article, that or they need to be better distributed.  The main problem is under the exploration section, which is set up so two pictures appear before any text causing a large blank area between the title "Exploration" and the rest of the text.  I don't want to arbitrarily remove a picture, any agreement on which one should go or where to move one if we want to keep them all? --The Way 04:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too Many Pictures? 

message: I noticed the sentence about a "long-forgotten" Claus expedition. Mr Tambourine Man added this whimsical tidbit of vandalism just before this article was featured back in April of this year ('06). This was Mr Tambourine Man's only contribution.
See the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=&user=Mr+Tambourine+Man&page= which dates from April 6;
and especially:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mr_Tambourine_Man late on April 8.
As of this writing, I have yet to track the changes that susbsequently were made to this sentence since April. Anyone who would like to step through half a year of diffs is welcome to do so.
 Schweiwikist   (talk)  15:45, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch! I thought the sentence was suspicious too, but I wasn't bold enough to do anything about it. --Apoc2400 06:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claus Expedition: ''Whimsical vandalism, folks!''  

message: FA class for an article of top importance... THIS is the kind of thing Version 1.0 readers will want to see! If you have contributed significantly to Antarctica, feel free to put this barnstar on your page:
		The Geography Barnstar
		For commendable contributions to Antarctica, you have earned this Geography Barnstar! Gray PorpoisePhocoenidae, not Delphinidae 14:17, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excellent 

message: It seems this page gets a lot of vandalism. Is there any way for editors or others to protect this page? A302b 07:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frequent vandalism 

message: Probably an odd question, but what timezone(s) are used in Antarctica? Does the entire continent use UTC, or is it divided into 24 zones? Koweja 18:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timezone 

message: There now is a proposed WikiProject for Antarctica at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Antarctica. Any individuals in joining should indicate such there, and we will see if there is enough interest to create such a project. Badbilltucker 21:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed WikiProject 

message: During cold war USSR (Russia) an US agreed not to make any territorial claims nor to recognize them for the time being. But in article it looks like exceptional act of US nobility. Plz correct this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.159.244.170 (talk) 01:19, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The similar positions of Russia and the USA have nothing to do with nobility, it was an act of nations that did not wish to make and enforce sovereignty claims of their own at the time when other nations tried that, but at the same time they reserved the right to make such claims in the future, and explicitly rejected all claims i.e. the USA and Russia effectively prevented possible attempts by other nations to enforce claims.  Such a course of action matters in international law; undoubtedly, that behaviour of the USA and Russia helped pave the way towards the Antarctic Treaty. Apcbg 19:08, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political chapter is biased 

message: The map that states which countries have claimed the various parts of Antarcta, seems to be inaccurate. It states that the South Orkney Islands is controlled by Argentina which it most certainly is not! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.142.164.165 (talk) 17:43, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  South Orkney Islands 

message: The map that states which countries have claimed the various parts of Antarcta, seems to be inaccurate. It states that the South Orkney Islands is controlled by Argentina which it most certainly is not! Please could you explain this and correct it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.142.164.165 (talk) 17:44, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The map says no such thing.  It shows an Argentine station on those islands, like it shows several stations of other stations elsewhere.  The claims are marked by coloured delimitation lines. Apcbg 19:08, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  South Orkney Islands 

message: USer:Xareu bs added , sourcing this to http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2007/01/10/ciencia/1168421707.html. Which I can't read as its in Spanish. Gabriel de Castilla doesn't mention it. It looks entirely speculative to me, and the google translation  says the same: Also it is where is the island Livingston, chosen by Spain to install his first scientific base in 1988, located next to the beach where it assumes that they went to stop the shipwrecks of the “Gabriel de Castilla”, ship of the Spanish Navy that at the end of century XVIII was dragged by a weather. Those Spaniards to whom the Antártida swallowed could be, against their will, the first settlers. Spain has been looking for for years the test of that event, but not yet it has been.
William M. Connolley 12:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Naturally, there are blank spots in the early history of Antarctica, conjectures accepted by some historians and rejected by others while supported by very scarce or virtually nonexistant historical evidence.  The quoted article however is not even in that category; unfortunately its author has messed everything up: Gabriel de Castilla was person not ship, he did not wreck in Antarctica but returned safely, and he did not live in the XVIII but in XVI-XVII Centuries. All that is known about his voyage to the south is a couple of sentences recording evidence by a Dutch sailor who took part in it.  Nothing and nobody (excepting the confused author of that article) relates Gabriel de Castilla with any wreckage at any particular island (he didn't wreck after all).  Yes Spanish archeologists have been doing research on Livingston Island (cf. Livingston Island:History) for some years, for good reasons too, looking for evidence of the Spanish gunship San Telmo lost in September 1819 together with its crew and troops numbering 644 men.  Nothing to do with Gabriel de Castilla though. Apcbg 14:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks a lot (obrigado) for this information. I found it very interesting.--Xareu bs 14:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gabriel de Castilla 

message: I've deleted the recent edits by Stokage, which added a mention of a supposed Brazilian claim between (the editor's text) "250°E to 300°E" (?!?). I've also asked for a speedy delete of the article Província Brasileira na Antartica (created today by the same editor) on the following basis:"There is no evidence on Google or reputable Antarctic pages; the article contradicts Brazil Antarctic Geopolitics, itself cited for contradicting Antarctic territorial claims; the article contains what appear to be nonsense claims about thousands of inhabitants, snowboard championships, and a village of five thousand people named "Qjaskwalla"."If anyone knows of any reason why this should be taken seriously, please let me know, and I'll pull the SD request. However, given the number of apparent fallacies in the article, and the amount of vandalism that occurs here, it seems pretty suspicious. Thoughts? --Ckatzchatspy 05:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That article is a joke of course; there is no Brazilian sovereignty claim but a declared 'zone of interest' (not much promoted) which is in Western Antarctica, very far from the funny claim. Apcbg 08:37, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree there is no Brazilian claim William M. Connolley 09:39, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speedy delete request for Província Brasileira na Antartica 

message: In one section it ssys that the average thickness of the ice sheet is 1.6 Km, in another 1.6 Miles. Does anyone know the correct thickness of the ice sheet?Richbank 03:23, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello!  I think this might be difficult to pin down (given the estimated volume of ice) and, hence, sources vary: a perusal of these sources indicates: "1.6 km (1 mi)", "6,500 ft (2,000 m)", "1.5 miles (2.45 km)", and (vaguely) "thousands of feet thick".  My geographical dictionary indicates that the ice sheet averages 1 mi (1.6 km) in thickness.  To be safe yet accurate, I revised the introduction to read "at least 1.6 km", which is accurate no matter what value is ultimately correct. Quizatz Haderach 13:27, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Surely there is some uncertainty, but just saying 'at least 1.6 km' seems to give it too much uncertainty.  If you take the numbers for ice volume from Climate of Antarctica and divide by the ice-sheet area you get 2.45 km, and even if you divide that volume by the area of the continent, including rock and ice shelves, you get about 2.1 km.  I would suggest 'between 2.0 and 2.5 km', or at least 'between 1.6 and 2.5 km' to put an upper limit on it.  Any objections/suggestions?  StephenHudson 19:50, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm; I would suggest including an agreeable figure we can cite.  The above lesser figure is from a geographical dictionary (and the current version at least provides for some wiggle room); I would not object to revising figures based on the morphometric data (from Drewry, 1983) in the Climate of Antarctica article -- 2.16 km, representing the average thickness of the sheet which includes ice shelves and rises -- or another authority and updating said figures wherever they might appear.  Since we are dealing with an average, though, I'd much prefer to indicate '(around) x', 'at least x', or 'x +/-y' as opposed to 'between a and b'. Quizatz Haderach 21:12, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I have since made editions of 'around 2.2 km' in a number of spots. Quizatz Haderach 00:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks!  Maybe in light of this, I'll defer to my prior comments/position and not have to pull my hair out too much. :) Quizatz Haderach 05:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 1.6?

message: I removed the link to the Antarctic Flora article. That is a paleobotanical article about trees etc that lived on Antarctica a long time ago, not about current flora of Antarctica.
Ordinary Person 05:18, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Antarctic Flora 

message: I thought I read in the papers some years ago of a newly discovered predator in Antarctica.  It has a forehead and snout richly supplied with blood vessels, and has a high body temperature.  It uses that to help burrow through ice.  Apparently, a group of them will go burrowing under the ice where a penguin is standing, undermining it until the penguin falls through.  Then they attack and eat the penguin.  Can anybody shed any light?  140.147.160.78 16:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is nonsense.  Dragons flight 17:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

text: You are thinking of the fictional Hotheaded Naked Ice Borers.  This was a hoax perpetrated by Discover Magazine in its April 1995 issue: http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/aprilfool/comments/864/ Wbrameld 06:39, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh great!  You're absolutely right.  I followed that link, and I remember that picture.  OK, I've been had.  72.66.108.162 03:23, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Turns out the Hotheaded Naked Ice Borer has a Wikipedia article.  So I've linked your reference to it.  Thanks for sorting me out (hangs head in shame).  72.66.108.162 03:30, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recently discovered predator? 

message: Does anyone mind if I convert the existing references to use the Wikipedia:Citation templates? MahangaTalk to me 04:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. MahangaTalk to me 17:06, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: references

message: I'm wondering about the image of the Endurance at "night"... Yes, I know it says it's a night photograph both in the caption and at the Library of Congress page... but...
* The image is remarkably well-lit; even the mast's of the ship, considerably further away than the foreground, are still very bright
* I'm not familiar enough with the history of flashes, but at least the magnesium-potassium flashes supposedly were prone to exploding; I don't know if Shackleton would've wanted that on his ship (but maybe the ingredients could be transported separately and then be mixed on the spot?); or else he maybe still used the magnesium-only flashes, again, I don't know enough, but wonder...
* The light clearly comes from the side; now, that could be due to the fact that the early flashes were just material that burnt for several seconds--so Shackleton (or whoever took the photograph) maybe just had someone light it there because of the effect on shades etc.; again, the view of an "expert" on the history of flashes would seem interesting; at least, the large angle between the photographer's view and the light source are remarkable.
* Old pictures are sometimes filed as inverse images (don't know why, maybe they just got the negatives, whatever)
* The picture simply looks just as good when inverted--dark foreground, which could be explained by the light conditions, but apart from that, simply a regular picture during daytime.
So much for my musings. Any ideas? --Ibn Battuta 15:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your streams of consciousness! :o) I've asked at the Commons, and having found that the expedition has taken at least some night photographs, it might actually be one of them... Just to satisfy your insatiate appetite for information about this picture. --Ibn Battuta 19:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  image really at night? 

message: There is in fact a stable population of about 130 people living in the Antarctic pensinsula. It is called "Villa Las Estrellas", and it is a chilean settlement.
You OUGHT to put this information in this article. And it´s not vandalism.
Here is the article in spanish:
Villa Las Estrellas es junto a la base argentina "Esperanza", la única población estable en la Antártica. Fue inaugurada el 9 de abril de 1984, y pertenece a Chile. Forma parte del complejo de la Base Presidente Eduardo Frei Montalva, dependiente de la Fuerza Aérea de Chile, el que está conformado por el Centro Meteorológico Antártico Presidente Eduardo Frei Montalva, la Base Aérea Teniente Rodolfo Marsh Martin y la Villa Las Estrellas.
La villa está compuesta por aproximadamente 15 casas que habitan familias de funcionarios de la Fuerza Aérea de Chile, de la Dirección General de Aeronáutica Civil, científicos y profesores, todos los cuales permanecen entre uno y dos años en el lugar. La población varía de unos 80 habitantes en invierno a más de 150 en verano.
La villa sirve como cabecera de la comuna Antártica Chilena, la que junto a la comuna de Cabo de Hornos, forman la provincia Antártica Chilena. Para los efectos administrativos y electorales, la comuna Antártica, forma una agrupación comunal con la de Cabo de Hornos, por lo que no elige autoridades propias.
Infraestructura
Entre sus instalaciones la villa cuenta con:
Escuela F-50 "Villa Las Estrellas": dos profesores son los responsables de impartir la educación primaria (1º a 8º grado de Enseñanza General Básica) a los aproximadamente 15 niños de Villa Las Estrellas, en esta escuela que depende del Ministerio de Educación. Cuentan con el apoyo de modernos equipos de computación, lo que le permite estar incorporada a la Red Enlaces.
Hospital: depende de la Fuerza Aérea de Chile y cuenta en forma permanente con un médico y un enfermero. Está dotado de moderno instrumental: equipo de rayos X, laboratorio, quirófano, equipo de anestesia, esterilizador y farmacia. Hay dos camas para hospitalizados y se dispone de una clínica dental.
Mediante un proyecto tecnológico que se está implementando recientemente con personal del Instituto Antártico Chileno y de la Universidad de Chile, en casos de urgencia -mediante un enlace satelital- se pueden enviar fotografías de afecciones a la piel o de anomalías oculares, imágenes de electrocardiogramas, radiografías, etc., a centros de salud especializados ubicados en Santiago, o entidades de Argentina, Alemania e Italia, vinculados al proyecto, los que colaboran en el diagnóstico y sugieren el tratamiento. El equipamiento que dispone el hospital permite efectuar ciertas operaciones de urgencia.
Oficina de Correos: esta oficina depende de la Empresa de Correos de Chile y durante el verano es atendida por uno de sus funcionarios; en invierno, está a cargo del comandante de la base. Toda la correspondencia dirigida a las bases chilenas y extranjeras del sector llega a las dependencias de Punta Arenas y desde allí es remitida a la Villa Las Estrellas. Aquí, el encargado la clasifica y distribuye vía avión o helicóptero a sus destinatarios. Por su parte, la correspondencia que sale de la Antártica se centraliza en esta base y se remite a Punta Arenas desde donde se distribuye a las diferentes ciudades y países.
Bancos: una sucursal del Banco de Crédito e Inversiones opera durante todo el año a cargo de un funcionario de esa entidad bancaria. Los servicios allí prestados sirven a nacionales y exranjeros, normalmente científicos, que depositan o giran dinero habitualmente. También existe una sucursal del BancoEstado.
Iglesia: hay una capilla católica, ("Santa María Reina de la Paz") que es visitada por los habitantes de las diversas bases de la isla Rey Jorge.
Gimnasio: de moderna construcción, ofrece facilidades para la práctica del tenis, beibifútbol, básquetbol y vóleibol. Dispone de máquinas de ejercicios, mesas de ping pong, camarines y sauna.
Andarivel: un andarivel de arrastre de cien metros de largo permite desarrollar actividades de ski en las cercanías de la base.
Supermercado: abastecido de los alimentos necesarios, es utilizado principalmente por las familias de Villa Las Estrellas.
Biblioteca Pública Nº 291: cuenta con un significativo número de libros y revistas que están a disposición de quien lo requiera.
Radio F.M. "Soberanía": emite en la frecuencia de 90.5 MHz. Funciona durante el día proporcionando música e informaciones a todas las bases del sector. Difunde también ciertos programas culturales y de entretención realizados por el personal y sus familias.
Hostería "Estrella Polar": se ubica en las cercanías del aeródromo y tiene capacidad para 80 personas. Es utilizada por personal de la Fuerza Aérea, visitas y científicos nacionales o extranjeros.
Bazar: una pequeña tienda de venta de recuerdos es administrada por algunas de las señoras de la villa; el producto de las ventas es a beneficio del Consejo Nacional de Protección a la Ancianidad (CONAPRAN).
Oficina del Servicio de Registro Civil e Identificación de Chile: el jefe de la base, dado el caso, se desempeña como oficial de Registro Civil con todas las atribuciones inherentes a este cargo.
Teléfonos: para la base y el aeródromo, existe enlace telefónico via satélite; además, para los habitantes del sector hay un teléfono público operado con monedas y tarjetas de prepago.
Antena de telefonía móvil: desde 2005 existe una antena de telefonía móvil perteneciente a la empresa chilena Entel PCS.
Servicio de Internet.
Estación repetidora de Televisión Nacional de Chile.
:Our article at Villa Las Estrellas states that it is a research base - albiet one with some families - and is listed at List of research stations in Antarctica.  I'm not sure why it would require specific mention on the main Antarctica page. -- Chuq (talk) 06:10, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ANTARCTICA POPULATION 

message: Not knocking the article. I learn a lot. In any event, the article contains this sentence (which is, of course, footnoted to its source): “The area between 90°W and 150°W is the only part of Antarctica, indeed the only solid land on Earth, not claimed by any country.” I can think of an exception to this: the West Bank (exclusive of East Jerusalem, which, whether one agrees with the claim or not, is at least claimed by Israel). Wikipedia's own article on the West Bank notes: “From 1948 until 1967, the area was under Jordanian rule, though Jordan did not officially relinquish its claim to the area until 1988. It has been occupied by Israel following the conclusion of the Six-Day War.[1] With the exception of East Jerusalem, it was not annexed by Israel. The West Bank is currently considered under international law to be de jure a territory not part of any state.” No other country--not even Israel (with the exception noted) or Jordan -- claims the West Bank territory as being de jure its own. Perhaps the exception could be noted... some student someplace will cite the Wikipedia for the proposition that this wedge of Antarctica is the only unclaimed solid land on earth... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.197.146.171 (talk • contribs).
:The sentence remains correct in spirit, since the State of Palestine claims the West Bank (among other areas). The State of Palestine is also one of the countries included in our List_of_countries, so it's not clear to me that the sentence is even technically incorrect. But if you'd prefer some other wording, please feel free to suggest it. -- Avenue 20:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re Unclaimed Territory 

message: http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/05/16/antarctica.melting.reut/index.html
wow
yeah wow, call me a sceptic, but, if 2007 satellite technology were available in the year 1850 or 1750 or any other 50 what's to say they wouldn't show exactly the same thing?! That ICE melts, and re-freezes, even huge chunks the size of California!.  A few modern, pretty, colourful fancy graphs and the argument is done and dusted. Or just spin it for the ratings doom and gloom cable-network style. I'm not saying for a minute that global warming isn't happening presently, it has to be going some direction, the Earth is warming or cooling in cycles, and they're a lot longer than 30 year cycles.--Dean1970 04:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The size of california just melted in antartica 

message: Should there be a blurb about religion?  I seem to recall at least one Russian Orthodox Church on Antarctica. 71.93.238.14 20:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Here it is - Trinity Church, Antarctica. I added it to the See Also.71.93.238.14 22:50, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I added a link to Religion in Antarctica in the article on demographics, which describes the people there.  -- SEWilco (talk) 02:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion? 

message: It's not a particularly obvious vandalism target. Any theories?--h i s   s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 14:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: IF the ice caps were to melt the whole world will be under water...and globle warming couses them to mealt and indestry couses glouble warming.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.142.156.197 (talk) 21:11, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does this page receive so much vandalism? 

message: I watched a TV series about modern remakes of the Amundsen & Scott expeditions, using the original equipment, clothes, sleigh dogs, etc, but where the actual trip took place on Greenland since dogs (they claimed) are not allowed on Antarctica.  Is this correct?  Does anybody know why? --KYN 18:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because no alien species whatsoever are allowed in Antarctica, the sole exception (partial) being Homo Sapiens. Apcbg 19:28, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

text: There appear to be two parts to the dog and alien species ban.  The ban on alien species is to keep them from taking hold in an environment that has evolved without them (if polar bears were introduced to the Antarctic coast and they managed to survive, they could devastate the penguin population, which raise their young unprotected on the ice since they have no natural predators out of the water).  Introduced species have caused environmental problems around the world.  For some time dogs were exempted (humans and food still are), but then there was concern that canine diseases might be transmitted to seals, leading to the removal of all dogs by 1994.  Read more on these British Antarctic Survey pages:   and .  StephenHudson 02:59, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dogs not allowed on Antarctica