Talk:Mesoarchean

message: AMK152 proposed in edits of 27 December 2006 a geotimebox for this article.  I feel that the box information that is appropriate for the article is already in the Neoarchean infobox and the footer, and that other information can be supplied where important, by links from the text.   See discussion at Template talk:Geotimebox. --Bejnar 20:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:AMK152|AMK152's]] Geotimeboxes

message: This article states:
"The first supercontinent Vaalbara broke up during this time around 2.8 ma."
Shouldn't this be 2.8 Ga? From the article describing year measurements:
"gigaannum, usual symbol Ga, is a unit of time equal to 109 years (one billion on the short scale, one milliard on the long scale)." --24.20.229.67 (talk) 05:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timescale inconsistency 

message: I understand that this is only a stub of an article. The next step in its development surely must be a definition of the mesoeoarchaen era. By definition, I mean something like the following examples :
The paleophanerozoic is defined as the chron (time period) between the Cambrian explosion and the Permian Great Dying.
The mesophanerozoic is defined as the period of time between the Permian Great Dying and the Asteroid strike of 65 Mya.
I am not knowledgable enough to provide this needed definition. I must rely on those who have the knowledge.
Please note that the definition is not dependent on science knowing when a defining event occured, only that it occurred and is how the era is defined.
Thanks
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Paleoarchean"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlasilva (talk • contribs) 18:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition needed 

message: This image was added in the article as a representation of the Earth during Mesoarchean period. this might be ugly 07:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Please continue in the "Can you let me add this image to Mesoarchean?" below here. this might be ugly 08:50, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox image 

message: Copied from User talk:Dudley Miles
Since the previous image i was going to use does not mean anything for the article, this time i'm trying my best to become more accurate. This image is Vaalbara, one of the first Earth supercontinents. IIRC Vaalbara is a Mesoarchean supercontinent, not a Paleoarchean supercontinent (since the article mentions proto-Vaalbara paleoarchean supercontinent that does not exist). As such i'm going to use that image on the article i've tried to add an image days ago but failed. Please note that i use this video as a source, and that video uses scholarly sources (please carefully take a look at credits in the end of that video). I would like that you allow it this time around, since this article was in your watchlist. And by the way, this image was used in Vaalbara article. I didn't use the Ur image because you told me that image is not appropriate for Wikipedia, but this image got used (Vaalbara) and it wasn't me who added it. I'm sorry for getting aggresive here, but i had to do so rather than getting in a conflict again! By the way, i know this is a reconstruction (in which 3 billion years out, considered "speculative"), but i want this image to be added to complete the project. Many other articles have it by this date (the reason why they are removed is because of the copyright problem. When i readded these images back, i'm doing my best to avoid copyright violations by using images that are Creative Commons licensed), and with addition of this image, all geologic periods and eras will have an image. this might be ugly 03:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW I've added this image to the talk page of Mesoarchean for more audience. this might be ugly 07:26, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

text: There are several issues here. 1. What makes Vaalbara (if it existed) a supercontinent? It seems more like an island from the period before continents existed. On a quick look, none of the scholarly sources appears to use the term supercontinent. 2. Citing the sources of a YouTube video on a talk page is not satisfactory sourcing. You need to cite the scholarly sources used in the description or source fields of the file itself, so that anyone looking at the image can check the sourcing. 3. I do not see any evidence for the latitude you show in the image. 4. Why does the image not resemble the two cratons which formed the island shown in the Vaalbara article? 5. Thanks for your work on the image, but I do not understand how an image which guesses the shape and latititude of a possible Archean island helps the reader. Dudley Miles (talk) 08:43, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

text: The image is too "vague" to be useful in the article. Such an "artistic view" is just clutter. Vsmith (talk) 12:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can you let me add this image to Mesoarchean?