Talk:Afro-Eurasia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Earth sciences Portal
Afro-Eurasia is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Non-inclusion

The map includes Madagascar; that shouldn't be colored in. --Golbez July 9, 2005 08:34 (UTC)

so it has japan too, what's your point. madagascar is apart of africa like japan is of asia. - 67.118.132.232 23:08, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Japan shouldn't be colored in either, or Britain. Note that Sumatra and Borneo aren't colored in. Yes, they are part of their continents, but they are not part of the Africa-Eurasia landmass. If you're going to call this the "world island" then it should be only one island. --Golbez 00:01, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
Nor taiwan? --ThrashedParanoid 20:48, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
Nor taiwan. --Tothebarricades 10:57, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Right on. If the map is to stay put, then the adjoining text needs to be much clearer about the nearby islands being associated with but (quite obviously) not physically part of this supercontinent. //Big Adamsky 02:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
The maps are fine. The text needs to clearly distinguish between a continental mainland and associated lands: pro forma, a continent is a large continuous landmass, but conventional notions regarding continents (e.g., politically) typically embrace the mainland and adjacent islands and territories. And don't let water fool you: remember that many of these lands are associated geophysically through tectonic plates. Similarly, consult any dictionary (e.g., Oxford) for, say, Japan and you'll get something like this (emphasis added):
a country in eastern Asia, occupying a festoon of islands in the Pacific roughly parallel with the east coast of the Asiatic mainland ...
though "festoon" is hardly a commonplace word. :) I hope this helps. E Pluribus Anthony 07:12, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suez Canal

Since when Asia and Europe are separated by the Suez Canal? An obvious mistake... - 68.199.159.52 04:44, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

The sentence you mention is confusing indeed:
It is typically subdivided into the continents of Africa and Eurasia – which is culturally, but not geographically, subdivided into Europe and Asia – separated by the Suez Canal.
The phrase between hyphens is an insertion, and what are separated by the Suez Canal are Africa and Eurasia. I'll rewrite it. - TAKASUGI Shinji 10:13, 17 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Eufrasia?

I've heard Eufrasia somewhere. Is that a real name? Jigen III 17:19, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Population

Stating the pupulation to be exactly 5,455,012,581 is incorrect. The total population varies every second on account of births and deaths. A more correct way would be to say "The population is close to 5.5 billion." Or omit the sentence all together, just keeping "[...] containing around 85% of the World population." Dj tricky 16:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Islands

The Islands shouldn't be colour green if this article is specific to the single land mass. - Ajuk 21:59, 05 June 2007 (UTC)

It depends on definition. Continent may or may not include surrounding islands. - TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 04:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Source

I have added several citation needed tags, and we haven't got sources for the following terms yet:

  • Africa-Eurasia
  • Asiafrica
  • Eufrasia
  • Eurasiafrica
  • Eurasica

I'm afraid some of them were coined by Wikipedians. The following terms are known to have been used in academic books and journals:

  • Afrasia
  • Afro-Eurasia
  • Eurafrasia
  • World Island

The problem is that the current title Africa-Eurasia has no reliable source now. It must be a geological term because historians prefer Afro-Eurasia. Can anyone provide a source? If nobody can find one, the article must be renamed to Afro-Eurasia. The World Island is the oldest term but it's not appropriate since it clearly excludes surrounding islands. - TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 04:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Don't wait for an Africa-Eurasia source. Even if there is one, according to what you've just said, Afro-Eurasia is the more common term and should be the article title. I also am behind removing any term you believe is original research. If users would like to re-add previously unverified terms, they can add them simultaneously with sourcing. Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 04:49, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your advice. - TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 05:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

The article should be renamed to Afro-Eurasia. As I have explained above, it's a common term among historians. We don't have a reliable source for Africa-Eurasia. - TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 05:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I've noticed the article was renamed a few minutes after my proposal. I don't delete the move tag now, for a further discussion. - TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 05:19, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
I remove the move tag since nobody provides any other source. - TAKASUGI Shinji 01:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)