Talk:Whirlpool

message: This feature of the Niagara River has nothing to do with the presence of the Falls about a mile upstream. The whirlpool is the result of the erosion of different layers which caused a bend in the river at that point. It is not related to the falls.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.206.16.35 (talk) 19:14, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Niagara River Whirlpool 

message: Where does a whirlpool end?  After being swallowed by one where does one end?
: The bottom. They're eddies in the current, not water being sucked into the depths of the earth. Except in the case of the lake in Louisiana referenced in the article.Kuroji 19:08, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where does it end? 

message: HOW DO WHIRLPOOLS HAPPEN?
Is it true that whirlpools spin in a counterclockwise direction in the northern hemisphere and clockwise in the southern hemispere?
Charlie
chuck22@bestweb.net
*The really important question is... What do they do on the equator? Wahkeenah 01:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whirlpools 

message: Is it just me or does anyone else not see a whirlpool?
--BlueStream 08:30, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Saltstraumen picture is a whirlpool? 

message: I can't see a whirlpool in that video, just some turbulence and other hydraulic effects.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.22.82 (talk) 13:22, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, I watched several times and it's just turbulent water.  Removing.  --Bridgecross (talk) 19:18, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video is a wirlpool? 

message: There's a lot of overlap between the articles; better to keep everything in one place. —me_and 21:20, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Maelstrom]] 

message: I object to [someone's] insistence that the whirlpool's action be described as "sucking." There is no suction involved. Objects are pulled toward the vortex according to the flow of the surrounding water. I changed the wording accordingly, as it is both a more accurate and less colloquial word choice—and now I see that someone has arbitrarily changed it back. rowley (talk) 18:49, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Sucked" in? 

message: The article repeats Corryvrecken being the third largest twice, but it begs the question. 
Perhaps the content is being ripped too closely from this Doyle source. 
I mean, stating the 3rd largest and the 1st and 2nd strongest seems a bit quircky. --Kiyoweap (talk) 13:11, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest 

message: Reference [2] seems to be broken. I think that this is the same article, but am not sure (I do not know what webecoist.com is)..
https://www.momtastic.com/webecoist/2009/07/24/10-magnificent-maelstroms-and-destructive-whirlpools/
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wallby (talk • contribs) 18:04, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference [2] is broken. Is "this" website the same website? 

message: Any idea what the story is behind the malstom—presumably maelstrom—marked across most of the Sargasso Sea in this 1761/3/4 map later reprinted in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1st ed.? Does the Sargasso Sea produce any whirlpools? It's an old mistake? or what? — LlywelynII 16:48, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Sargasso Sea