Talk:Littoral zone

message: In physical_oceanography the littoral zone refers to coastal regions of significant tidal flow, frequently extending to the continental shelf break, or to depths of nearly 200 m.  The physical processes generally include non-linear flows, internal waves, river outflows, oceanic fronts, and submarine canyons.  rmo13 02:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add PO definition 

message: The term littoral zone is used in ways that sometimes seem confusing. Look at these google definitions! Anyway, I have expanded the article and tried to thread a way through the confusion. --Geronimo20 (talk) 06:28, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Defining the littoral zone

message: This revert is unacceptable . The revert puts back in place bolding for terms that are not synonyms for the article title, breaking the guideline MOS:BOLDTITLE. It also reinserts text that is already in the daughter article, breaking the guideline about sub-articles. Lastly, it's impolite to revert good faith edits. Demanding consensus for minor cleanups is plain nonsense and smacks of WP:OWN. FurrySings (talk) 09:12, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Your rudeness deserves no response, but I'll make a few points. Firstly, you instruct me in an edit summary to read WP:BRD. Read it yourself; you are the one who did not follow its recommendations. Secondly, exactly where in MOS:BOLDTITLE does it say that you cannot use bold in the main body of an article? Thirdly, exactly where in the guideline does it say that a parent article cannot have text that is duplicated in a sub-article? It is necessary and not impolite to revert good faith edits when they are misguided. However, your revert of my reversion was impolite, as are your arrogant comments on my talk page. Your further revert, not waiting for a reply here, is outright edit warring. --Epipelagic (talk) 10:04, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Apparently you are someone who can dish out rude behavior, but can't take any pushback. Since you ask, and appear unwilling to lookup the guidelines for yourself, I will quote the guidelines. MOS:BOLDTITLE states, "Only the first occurrence of the title and significant alternative titles are placed in bold", WP:MOSBOLD states, "Boldface (text like this) is common in Wikipedia articles, but only for certain usages. ... (a list of usages follow: Article titles, Table headers and captions, Terms listed in list articles, Synonyms and Redirects to the article within the first few paragraphs, Mathematical objects, Journal Volume Numbers)" It ends, "Use italics, not boldface, for emphasis in article text." FurrySings (talk) 10:31, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  WP:MOSBOLD specifically says that bold can be used to "identify terms in the first couple of paragraphs of an article (or section of an article) which are the targets of redirects" (italics added). The bold terms you removed are, or should be, the targets of redirects. You made no attempt to answer the third question: Which guideline says that a parent article cannot have text that is duplicated in a sub-article? Nor have you acknowledged the roughshod manner in which you rode over WP:BRD. Your changes are way out of process, and you should revert them until such times as consensus has been reached here. --Epipelagic (talk) 10:57, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Please, those sections have dedicated articles -- synonyms should be directed at the dedicated articles. Since I do not see you asking for permission on article talk pages before making changes to articles, I cannot believe that you are arguing in good faith. I'm going to ignore you now. KTHXBYE, FurrySings (talk) 15:10, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverting good faith edits 

message: This page has to serve historian-geographers for whom the term littoral is well-established as a large swath of territory surrounding a major body of water, such as the Mediterranean or the Black Sea.  I do not know where to begin to add such a portion to this because this article is solely given over to the oceanographic interpretation.  Separate article, new section, what?  Who can make such a decision?
--Nlight2 (talk) 13:22, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Well the article discusses the use of the term in marine biology and by the military as well as in oceanography. Additionally, it says the term derives from the Latin litoris meaning "shore". But if you think this does not do justice to the way historians and geographers use the term, and that they have instead well defined but different uses for the term, then be bold and add the section you think is missing. It will be fine to make the decision yourself, so long as you enter relevant text with reliable sources. However, I suspect that historians and geographers generally use the term somewhat vaguely and without specific precision, piggybacking somewhat on established uses of the term elsewhere. --Epipelagic (talk) 17:52, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Littoral as human geographic zone