Template talk:Continents of Earth

message: As far as the ordering the continents goes, it seems to me that we have two options: 1) by size (current) 2) alphabetically (my revision).
*In contest of the first, although size does provide a method of ordering, I would argue that it needlessly defers to some arbitrary second criterion.  Why not population size, for instance?  Or maybe average ascending altitude?  Perhaps even descending altitude for that matter?
*In advocacy of the second, alphabetical ordering is most well-known and common method of ordering lists.  Any other method would be duly noted as arbitrary and confusing.  If, for instance, the index of book listed contributing authors by the size of their reputations (or their egos at that), we would be utterly dumbstruck.  By doing so alphabetically, however, a common, non-biased standard is used.
Therefore, I have reordered the Continents template alphabetically.
: Lucidity 06:42, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Order of continents

message: While it is true that by "definition" it is not a continenet, it is also true that by definition Iceland, Greenland, Cuba, etc are not part of their respective continents.  Yet, they still appear on the maps.  In the same way, Oceania is not by definition a continent however it acts as one, and is considered one by many as shown by the continent article. This is why I argue for its inclusion. 74.137.230.39 02:18, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oceania is definitely a geographical region, as Template:Regions of the world reflects, but it is not a geological continent. New Zealand and the myriad islands in the Pacific are part of the Oceania region, but they are not part of any continent. On the other hand, India is a geological continent, so perhaps it should be added. -- bcasterline • talk 03:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My point is should be go the technical way with continents, by removing Iceland Greenland, Cuba, Falklands, etc or should we go the way the general public perceives contienents. 74.137.230.39 15:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The way they're currently organized is technical -- Greenland and Cuba are part of continental North America. The Falklands and Iceland are not part of a continent, but they aren't on the maps. -- bcasterline • talk 19:15, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Iceland is on the Europe map and the Falklands are on South American map. According to wikipedia "A continent is a large continous land mass" meaning that Cuba would not be part of North America technically. 74.137.230.39 20:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Quoting the Greenland article "associated with the continent of North America" meaning it is not part of the continent if we go by technical definitions becasue it is just as easily, and often considered part of Europe. 74.137.230.39 20:06, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, they are on the map. I would say that's geologically incorrect -- same as putting New Zealand on the Australia map. But those maps are used for articles that define regions geographically, not geologically, in which case the Falklands are part of South America and Iceland is part of Europe. Greenland and Cuba, however, are considered to be part of the North American continent geographically and geologically -- Cuba is part of the of an accretionary belt, and Greenland is part of the Canadian Shield. Both have been part of the North American continent for 600+ million years. -- bcasterline • talk 20:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

text: If however we are going by "geological continents" or plate techtonics, it should probably be labeled that way, and the images need to be fixed. Arabia, India,and the caribbean  would be their own.(would we also add the Nazca, Scotia, etc. I don't know) Burma should be removed, as should Japan. I suppose this is why I prefer classying according to geography and culture instead of geology. Also Europe, and Asia should be removed as they are part of one continent.  74.137.230.39 20:12, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Continents aren't necessarily the same as tectonic plates, which you seem to be referring to. Sometimes different plates are each considered their own subcontinent, but not usually. Since there is already a separate template for regions of the world -- which is definitely geographic -- this template should focus on a geologic perspective. -- bcasterline • talk 20:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Australia a continent?

message: Kerguelen Plateau & Zealandia have recently been added in the section "Mythical and theorised continents". This is an inappropriate section for them as they are real places. If they are to remain, they need their own section called perhaps "Submerged continents". However I wonder whether there are other similar places or whether the likes of Madagascar and New Caledonia should be added too, perhaps in a section called "Submerged and fragmentary continents". These places are all now mentioned in the continent article. Nurg 09:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kerguelen Plateau & Zealandia 

message: There is currently discussion happening at Talk:Australia (continent) regarding changes to Australia (continent) and to Australia-New Guinea. In line with my proposals WRT those articles, I have produced a new draft of this template, which also includes a solution to the Kerguellen Plateau & Zealandia issue. Implementation of the draft template is dependent on what conclusion is reached at Talk:Australia (continent) so it may be well to discuss the draft there rather than here. The draft template would need a world map in the same dimensions as the others and with the Australian mainland alone coloured. Nurg 03:11, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australia and Australia-New Guinea 

message: Is there a way to shorten the width of this template? It looks too long. 74.106.19.218 01:24, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its width is auto-resizing. Don't know what you mean... MadMaxDog 22:37, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Width 

message: What are they??? It directs to Continent in the template.--Redtigerxyz 12:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical continents 

message: This section should be removed from the template. They are not Continents "of the world". Each of the three listed is on a different, fictional, non-Earth planet.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.231.190.230 (talk) 21:29, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fictional Continents? 

message: It would be really nice if there were maps of the supercontinents since most people are unfamiliar with them. I started to do it myself but a quick search through wikimedia shows that there really are no suitable maps there and the few that are there have some kind of strange license. Considering my own lack of knowledge about this subject, the uncertainties that probably exist about the exact shapes of the continents, and the fact that I don't have any map making software and its probably best if I just let someone who knows more about it do it. Lemmiwinks2 (talk) 11:05, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  maps of the supercontinents 

message: How about a microcontinents section for Madagascar etc? Or is it too much of an open question which they are? — kwami (talk) 08:03, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: A comprehensive list could be quite long, and there could be many grey areas. My initial feeling is that it's probably too off-topic to deserve inclusion here. Instead I think it would be better to expand the list we have in continental fragment. (I see you've done some work there lately.) --Avenue (talk) 00:04, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tried, but it's not my area and I don't have the sources. I asked in a local geology dept. a few years ago and was told there isn't any real dividing line, and I haven't found out a whole lot since, even for basics like the Caribbean. The impression I get is that if they aren't fragments, it often is a grey area, and even if they are, it's sometimes a matter of how many slivers of continent are embedded in how much igneous rock. And then of course we simply don't know in many cases. But it would be nice to try to expand the article: accepted fragments, micro-fragments embedded in oceanic matrix, incipient microcontinents which are not fragments, suspected or unclear cases. — kwami (talk) 00:56, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  microcontinents? 

message: Why the adding link to Arabic page is not listed here and here...???.ترجمان05 (talk) 10:59, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  ...? 

message: My perspective is that if India or Arabia or Turkey are considered part of Eurasia or the Caribbean or either North or South America or Central America being part of a combined Americas despite floating on their own plates, then the term "continent" or "supercontinent" must not necessarily be limited by the existence of plate boundaries. During ice ages for the last few million years, Afro-Eurasia and the Americas are linked via the Bering land bridge, and there is a history of an permanent to intermittent connection between the Americas and Eurasia going much further back. Should these very large and relatively recent entities be included on the list at all?
I independently added Afro-Eurasia-America to the template under the "Geological supercontinents" section. It is undeniable that there is a common continental shelf connecting the Americas to Afro-Eurasia and that as recently as the last glacial maximum or so one could walk on dry land from the Southern Cone of South America  to the Drakensberg mountains of South Africa by first traversing the Bering Land Bridge. If considered a continent, that land mass which constituted about 26 or 27% of the Earth's surface area and 85% or so of its surface area above sea level, would it not be considered a super-continent?Nanib (talk) 01:15, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The question is whether anyone covers this. Yes, Africa and S.America are both solidly linked to Laurasia, and we should definitely cover this in the continent and supercontinent articles, but a separate article is motivated by use in the literature. — kwami (talk) 08:16, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Bering Land Bridge Dependent