This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Whirlpool article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Maelstrom was copied or moved into Whirlpool with this edit on 2 February 2016. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This article was selected as the article for improvement on 23 May 2016 for a period of one week. |
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)
Where does a whirlpool end? After being swallowed by one where does one end?
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
WHY are there whirlpools and vortexes? We can describe them well enough...but why are they here?!
a_sweeping_current@hotmail.com
-Katie
Is it just me or does anyone else not see a whirlpool?
-- BlueStream 08:30, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
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)
There's a lot of overlap between the articles; better to keep everything in one place. — me_ and 21:20, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
These could be merged, but since the writing style is much simpler in the whirlpool article, it seems that it would be more approachable for younger readers than the maelstrom article. The Maelstrom article is in depth and detailed, covering fictional and musical references, while the whirlpool article leans toward a simpler, more matter-of-fact approach. Perhaps a brief explanation of vortices and more on small whirlpools should be added to one or the other. Centasiafriend ( talk) 22:48, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Whirlpool article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Maelstrom was copied or moved into Whirlpool with this edit on 2 February 2016. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This article was selected as the article for improvement on 23 May 2016 for a period of one week. |
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)
Where does a whirlpool end? After being swallowed by one where does one end?
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
WHY are there whirlpools and vortexes? We can describe them well enough...but why are they here?!
a_sweeping_current@hotmail.com
-Katie
Is it just me or does anyone else not see a whirlpool?
-- BlueStream 08:30, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
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)
There's a lot of overlap between the articles; better to keep everything in one place. — me_ and 21:20, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
These could be merged, but since the writing style is much simpler in the whirlpool article, it seems that it would be more approachable for younger readers than the maelstrom article. The Maelstrom article is in depth and detailed, covering fictional and musical references, while the whirlpool article leans toward a simpler, more matter-of-fact approach. Perhaps a brief explanation of vortices and more on small whirlpools should be added to one or the other. Centasiafriend ( talk) 22:48, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
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)