Talk:Geology of the Falkland Islands

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Geology of the Falkland Islands article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

Contents 1 British vs American Spellings 2 British vs American Spellings Relevant to Article 3 Terms Relevant to this Article 4 Geological Questions 5 Placenames 6 Dock? 7 Original source 8 Ongoing Translation 9 Misc. Notes 10 Introduction

[edit] British vs American Spellings

should we use brit or american spellings in this article?

arguments in favor of british spellings: the wiki manual of style (default to dialect of the place of the subject), cultural sensitivity over an area claimed by argentina and held by the U.K.(people killed each other over it), balance or 'equal time' for brits in an area that has many place-names in spanish used by english speakers (like the U.S. southwest), the brits may already be rubbed raw by this. or maybe they could care less.

arguments in favor of american spellings: maybe they are more globally understood, used and accepted than the british. maybe editors will constantly try to change the 'incorrect' brit. to the 'correct' amer. spelling. maybe editorial inertia will decide for us.

personally i think amer. is clearer. (but my inner child feels brit. is fun for a change although my outer adult thinks this is a violation of NPOV).

this issue will continue throughout the life of this article so reaching a consensus might be helpful.

please give your input and also vote one way or the other. thanks AnFu 04:18, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] British vs American Spellings Relevant to Article

metre, meter; kilometre, kilometer; colour, color; licence, license; dyke, dike; organisation, organization.

I don't much care about metre/meter--I was just reacting to an unexplained change of spelling. My major concern was "seizmic" to "seismic", which I'm fairly sure is the only English spelling. In British English, dyke may be more common than dike as used here, but in American English the dike spelling is more common. It does, however use British licence and colour, and in an area held by the U.K. changing to metres would be okay with me.

What about "end of the inferior or cenomaniano albiano to the beginning of the superior paleógeno"? What's the English terminology there? Are these particular formations (strata)? Are there English versions--and what about capitalization in English? Gene Nygaard 06:11, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

• • "...from the end of the inferior or cenomaniano albiano to the beginning of the superior paleogeno" puzzles me also. your questions are exactly the kinds of questions i've been having running around in my mind. i will change that phrase to a closer translation of the spanish: "Towards the end of the post-crest phase, from the end of the inferior Albian or Cenomanian to the beginning of the superior paleocene,..." found in Structure of the North Falkland River Basin: 1st paragraph, 3rd sentence. (but there's some spanish text missing there so that location may end up further down.) btw, i'v now tydied that paragraph.

see Terms Relevant to this Article. AnFu 09:21, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

inferior is lower and superior is upper and early (lower?) and late (upper?) are used but i can't remember which are used in what way.

So we'll let the geologists at it.

AnFu 09:06, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Terms Relevant to this Article

Capitalized: Albian, Aptian, Berriasian, Cambrian, Cenomanian(?), Cenozoic, Cretaceous, Devonian, Jurasic, Paleocene, Paleozoic, Pre-Cambrian, Permian, Silurian, Siluro-Devonian, Tithonian, Triassic, West Falklands Group, Valanginian, Carboniferous glaciation,

Capitalized: Cape Meredith Complex, Lafonia, Lafonia Group,

group:

formation:

AnFu 08:53, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Geological Questions

im looking for advice, authoritative input, and consensus on geological terminology. im just going to spill this out quickly w/the intention of tyding later.

i'll assume British Geological Survey is acceptably abbreviated as BGS.

should we use source rock or host rock for "roca fuente"? the bgs.ac.uk/falklands-oil/onshore/onshore_intro.htm site uses source rock.

Source rock is the petroleum geology term.

is 'mature rock' (per BGS) translated from 'roca madura' a geol. accepted term?

another specialized petroleum geology term means a well developed petroleum containing formation - I'm no petroleum geology expert though.

is there a geological abbreviation for 'below sea level'? bsl? b.s.l.?

Hmm ... not sure about that one.

thank you for your endevours to make this a better entry. AnFu 03:49, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Vsmith has geology background. My geology background is from the Discovery Channel. AnFu 15:11, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I do have a degree in economic geology, but haven't been active with it for a while. I have been trying to make this article readable over the past month or so - little at a time. I know little about the geology of the Falklands, I'm learning here - most interesting geologic history. Seems it would have been easier to write from scratch using the BGS site and other info than the translation bit, but wasn't aware of the BGS site when I started on it (yeah, should've researched a bit). As to British vs American English - I'm in the US so naturally write with that style, but have no real preference so if you want to change terms I use - feel free. Vsmith 01:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Placenames

I propose to change occurances of "Great Falkland" to "West Falkland" and "Soledad Island" to "East Falkland", as I believe these are the names English language speakers will recognise. In general our coverage of the Islands' geography is rather poor, and I don't beleive we have a page that names the geographic features of the islands in English and Spanish. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:18, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dock?

The word "dock" isn't used in English by geologists (I think). If this means "a big crack in the ground that is filled up with magma, leaving a hard granite wall" then the English word is dyke. Is this what you mean here? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:32, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Original source

My guess is that much of this article started off in English from a British Geological Survey publication as stated at the end. http://www.bgs.ac.uk/falklands-oil/onshore/onshoredef.htm seems to have some of the phrases and some of the rest may be linked from it. But then there is the danger of copyvios. --Henrygb 23:31, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

i have two questions which are not rhetorical. is it worth it to translate into english a spanish article whose source documents are in english? is there the danger of the game of "telephone"?

in spanish (from the spanish wiki) the article seems too vague, ambiguous, and general for an article on a scientific topic, which made me wonder how much it's been edited, translated or simplified. perhaps it's been strained thru too many brains such that the substance has been tossed in the bin.

the spanish article has elements and wording that are very, very similar to the english language falklands site noted in the first entry in this discussion. however, the spanish article also contains much more info than that site.

so is translation worth it or should people just build the entry from scratch (using source documents already in english)? Anfu AnFu 02:29, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ongoing Translation

I just want to inform other contributors that I'm contining to translate parts of this article. Mainly this means I'm trying to modify the English translation to more accurately reflect what the Spanish version (as of 3 March 2006) states (I'm calling this process 'matching'). I have also found phrases and even long sections from the Spanish that are missing in the English. I think, since it is being translated as a source for the English Wiki, it is important that the Spanish information is accurately represented. My concern is that 1) inadequate translations still are present, 2) editors, working with an inadequate translation, edited words and passages into something other than their original meaning or feeling, and 3) that, presented with passages of nonsense, editors decided to delete them. If, however, editors have made changes based on additional information not in the Spanish version, then I apologize and encourage them to reinstate their modifications. I will try to indicate changes so that others may find, review, and modify them if justified. I will again apoligize ahead of time for any toes I may inadvertantly step on. 3 march 2006 (forgot to sign) AnFu 18:41, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Misc. Notes

I think the first mention of geographical names should have the Spanish name also. Thereafter maybe only the english name should be used. The rational for including the spanish names is basically because of a shared english-spanish heritage as noted above.AnFu 21:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Introduction

a proper summarising introduction might be a future project. the way it begins now seems a bit abrupt and not introductory at all.AnFu 21:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC)