This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Do we really need to say 'Persia' next to Iran? The name of the country is universally 'Iran'. It's probably a big issue for some, so I wouldn't touch the text.

Not really the coutry name is Iran and Persia is an obsolete name. Mehrdad 16:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I find it extremely odd that there is no mention of the massive damage done to the lake by the Soviet Regime. (In point of fact, the Politburo wreaked catatrosphic environmental damage to the entire country--Chernobyl is merely the best known incident. The Aral Sea will soon disappear due to Soviet diversion of the vat majority of its two source rivers' volume for agricultural production.

Unfortunately, I don't have the time (nor the inclination) to do the necessary research to make up for the rather astonishing gap.

Surely the author of the article or a hydrologist (esp Russian or former Russian) could supply the deficiency.

PainMan 15:45, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

What is the source for the Caspian Sea area? 43600 km2 seems a bit on the high side.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.37.82.135 ( talk • contribs)

That is from: Lake Profile: Caspian Sea. LakeNet. -- Lethargy 15:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Other sources:

• [1] - 374,000 km²
• [2] - 371 000 square kilometres
• [3] - 386,400 km2
• [4] - 371,000 square kilometres
• [5] - "more than 400 thousand square kilometers."

So yes, what is currently there is a rather high estimate. We'll need to figure out which is the most reliable though. -- Lethargy 15:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Update: there is also this, [6] which states that the level of the Caspian Sea is rising. Perhaps that is why the sources differ? -- Lethargy 15:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

- Yes, the Caspian Sea is constantly changing in size and seal level due to its landlocked nature. I'd go with the ESA and UN figure of 371000 km2. These are two well respected sources and they seem to agree with each other.

- NASA says 373,000 km2. [7], which would seem to closely agree with the European Space Agency and United Nations figure.

- Since Kara-Bogaz-Gol is dry, it is no longer part of the Caspian surface area, so the lake has 18000 sq.km less from the official figures

How about a map which shows the location - maybe one similar to those used within Wiki for country articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.245.189.47 ( talk • contribs)

Hear hear! I was just about to add a similar comment. Quartier Latin1968 21:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

A politcal map that shows bordering countries would also be very helpful. -- musicpvm 08:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Even more helpful would be one that shows the bordering countries' boundaries within the Caspian Sea, given that there is an entire confusing section on it -- iMacWin95

Done. Kmusser 21:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I heard the real name of the Caspian Sea is Khazer/Xazer, whats up that?

Xazar is new name of it, refering to xazars who were living in eastern coast of Black Sea, they were appeared in geographical maps about 3 century after christ, This name is being used by turks, however arabs no longer using it, they use Qazvin Sea, and there is a conflit among Iranians to using Xazer or Mazandaran Sea, in present day of iran all of the people could understand where is the Xazar or Mazandaran Sea -- Ali 11:15, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

In Iran till early 20th century the caspian used to be called Daryaye e Khazar (دریای خزر) or Bahr e Khazar (بحر خزر). Since Khazar were Turkic people it was not looked at faverably , and due to the ultra nationalist ideological domiancy within the governments of the Pahlavi Era, the new name "Daryaye Mazadndaran" (دریای مازندران) replaced the old name, in some books.

The Arabic name for the Caspian sea Bahri e Qazvin also has been used in some Iranian texts. In fact the the Caspian is drived from this name and not from an imagenary tribe that used to live in Gilan as indicated in the article.

Please refer to Qazvin_Province. I will ask for the fact on this before correcting it. Mehrdad 17:05, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

No, Caspian people were living in the region of Mazandaran, they were ancedors of today Mazandarani people, Also i saw many of maps from Arabs which refer to it as Bahri Mazandaran, meaning Mazanderan Sea, Also Greek historians record it as Hyrcania Maro, the ancient name of Mazandaran ( Former Tabaria kingdom, Tabaristan), During the sassanid period it was known as Daryaye Tabaristan meaning Tabaristan Sea, later Mazandaran used instead of Tabaristan, the former name of Mazandaran, If you need some evidences please fill free to contacting me, Still the Governers and other people in many of newspapers and international issues call it Mazandaran Sea -- Ali 11:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

This article says that the salinity of Garabogazköl approaches that of seawater. According to the article on Garabogazköl, it's salinity is around 35% which is about 10 times that of seawater. Which is correct? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.139.38.79 ( talk) 03:30, 3 March 2007 (UTC). Now now, no need for sophistry, you know the author meant parts per thousand, im sure its easy to rectify--

Imo there should be a chapter about Mnemiopsis_leidyi and how it has literally destroyed the fishing economy on the Caspian sea. In a documentary I saw recently I recall the fishermen explaining that they can't make their living on fishing anymore as the jellyfish has killed nearly the whole fish population of the sea. piksi ( talk) 05:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll look up some sources for the jellyfish caused decline to the fishing economy but I'd love to have someone elses opinion on the subject too. -- piksi ( talk) 11:24, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

The following sentence: The Caspian owes what reduced salinity it has to its origins as a remnant of the World Ocean appears to my reading to be a direct contradiction with the sentence that immediately follows it: During warm and dry climatic periods, the landlocked sea has all but dried up, depositing evaporitic sediments like halite that have become covered by wind-blown deposits and were sealed off as an evaporite sink when cool, wet climates refilled the basin. So which is it? Is the Caspian saline because it was once part of the World Ocean, or because—as an endorheic lake—it has no outflow? The latter certainly seems more sensible to me, and I will delete the former sentence as contradicting the latter. Unschool ( talk) 19:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I have also removed it, as it is uncited and makes less sense. Halogenated ( talk) 22:10, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I was in error to think this had been thoughtlessly deleted. Forgive me, please. But why not quote a reputable source on this interesting point?-- Wetman ( talk) 01:13, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

It may well have had an impact on the salinity, but the fact that it is a closed basin undoubtedly contributes substantially to salinity, as is fairly common for all inland bodies of water with no surface drainage and poor internal drainage (e.g. Great Salt Lake). I will try and find a citation that specifically refers to the internal drainage of the Caspian Sea, but I don't have any hydrogeology texts that refer to that region handy. Halogenated ( talk) 01:31, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

There has been some disagreement on whether the Caspian Sea should appear in the various lake lists, so I thought it might be good to try to get some consensus on how to approach the issue. I started a discussion here and would welcome contributions. Rupert Clayton ( talk) 22:57, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

In the text, Astara has been named after Azerbaijan. Astara is located in Guilan province of Iran. Why is it writen Azerbaijan after Astara?

Msardejani ( talk) 05:47, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Astara is in both countries, see Astara, Azerbaijan and Astara, Iran. Kmusser ( talk) 15:03, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Why is the northern end of the sea a different color? - GTBacchus^{( talk)} 18:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Algae, I suppose. The northern part is very shallow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.120.157.196 ( talk) 16:13, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Why is the beginning of the paragraph only have a Russian translation?

"The Caspian Sea (Russian: Каспийское море).. "

I detect some bias here, maybe you should consider what is the oldest state in the region (Iran) and then add a Persian/Farsi translation of it next to or before the Russian.

These countries came after Iran (AZ,Khaz,Russia,Turk,etc). And all their histories are someway culturally, historically, ethnically tied to Iranians.

This has nothing to do with nationalism, its just sad to see this kind of stuff especially when Iran has lost so much of its land to the Russians. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.58.133.233 ( talk) 23:20, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). - 68.191.214.241 ( talk) 16:09, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Since Russia is on relatively good terms with Iran, the statement regarding "military intimidation" comes unexpectedly. It should be removed, unless it can be suppported by reliable sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.120.157.196 ( talk) 15:49, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I've made some edits, removing some of the more biased language in that section. The whole section ought to be re-written from sources. - 68.191.214.241 ( talk) 16:21, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

A map of depth, as in [8] for the Black Sea, is needed. Fig ( talk) 11:56, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

There is a discrepancy between the figures given for the volume of the Caspian Sea and its mean depth.

The sources I have seen generally give its volume as 78,200 cubic kilometers. Footnote 4 in the article gives this figure. It also gives a figure of 187 meters for the mean depth. However if the area of 371,000 is divided by 78,200, the mean depth figure computes to approximately 211 meters.

Further down in the source in footnote 4, a different figure of 436,000 square kilometers is given for the Caspian Sea. If this figure is divided by 78,200, the computed mean depth is 176 meters. This figure appears in a few other mostly older sources.

A figure of 417,000 square kilometers would give a mean depth of 187 meters. However I have not seen this figure in any source.

I have noticed a tendency to exclude Garabogazkol from the area for the Caspian Sea. Wikipedia gives its area as 18,000 sq km. If the source cited in Footnote 4 giving an area of 436,000 sq km includes Garabogazkol, the area for the Caspian Sea without this body of water would approximately support the mean depth figure given.

Numerous articles discuss the variations in the elevation of the Caspian Sea in the last century. They indicate an overall fluctuation of about 3 meters. Each meter of difference in the elevation of the sea would change its volume by roughly 400 sq km.

More significantly, such changes would probably cause very substantial changes in the surface area of the sea. The water in the northern part of the Caspian Sea, and particularly in the northeast area, is so shallow and the adjoining land gradiant is so slight that the sea could be many thousands of square kilometers larger if the level of the sea rose by only three meters--the range given. It could even explain, or partially explain the discrepancies in areas of the Caspian Sea given by various sources. However I have seen no discussion of this.

This topic could be one of interest in the article, particularly because of the environmental significance it would have. For now, I can only note it because I can find no sources giving specific information on this.

At a less significant level, it would have a bearing on the correct data for the actual volume and mean depth of the Caspian Sea. For now, I can only offer the provisional edit I made. Condylarth ( talk) 21:01, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

About this paragraph that I changed it:

According to Greek historian Strabo, the name ' Caspian' is supposed to have been derived from the Sanskrit word ' Kashyapa' the name of an ancient Indian Sage, as is also believed by the Hindus from India.( "Caspian Sea-The largest lake in the world". Buzzle.com. Retrieved 2010-05-17.)( "Indian History". Indiafirstfoundation.org. Retrieved 2010-05-17.)( "India-The mother of western civilisation". Organiser.org. Retrieved 2010-05-17.)( "Article on Hinduism". Trsiyengar.com. Retrieved 2010-05-17.)

Well, I checked the Strabo's Geography (see this) and compared the references this text referred to. I didn't find anything about "Kashyapa" in that (see this). The second-handed references that this paragraph referred to don't have any reference to their source in Strabo's text and scientifically I think they are not adequate and maybe fictionalized The relation between the Sage and the Sea's name. As I searched about "Kashyapa" I think it could be Indians believe of the origins of the word "Caspian" but Strabo didn't say that. So I change the sentence. If someone know anything more about that, please, clear the claim by references to Strabo's staff by details. P. Pajouhesh ( talk) 21:00, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

	An image used in this article, File:Ganj Par, Lower Paleolithic stone tools.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so ( commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 19:14, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Alefbe deleted the historical image of caspian sea whit out any discussion. Also he undid my edits in several article whit out any discussion.-- Ebrahimi-amir ( talk) 05:58, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

It is not much relevant to this page (it doesn't provide any important information in the context of this page). The other maps that I deleted in other pages were either bizarre "original research" or deliberate distortion of sourced maps (like "Azerbaijanilanguage.png" instead of "Azerilanguage.png"). Alefbe ( talk) 06:55, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't agree with you about "original research", but i change map with another version. -- Ebrahimi-amir ( talk) 04:42, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Maybe add Caspian sea is created via mountain drain and curdle. The sea looks like a depot for the gobi when it was created no more than 870,000 years ago. Could the caspian sea actually be where the black sea is now? Could the black sea be created via flood waters from india when africa rose and directed it from the south upon the lands? Could the gobi be a sea pocket which dried its waters and emptied its basin from the himas? Everything looks new actually, geologists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.100.60.164 ( talk) 17:13, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Are there any train ferries on the Caspian sea, and if so, what gauge?

I added a reference on the ferries. They mostly transport oil to Georgia. They are also used for passenger transport. Saule83 ( talk) 10:07, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Footnote 2 appears to lead to a dead link. --- Mannanan51 ( talk) 15:53, 21 July 2011 (UTC)mannanan51

Footnote 7 is also dead, but the correct link is here: http://www.caspianenvironment.org/newsite/Caspian-Background.htm 67.188.88.204 ( talk) 06:53, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. Bazonka ( talk) 20:40, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Azeri Turkic ?

Iran(Persia) or even it's sub states Media and Parthia have been around for much much longer than the Turkic language has in that part of the world...

the only existing language tree with thousands of years of a proven connection to the Caspian is the Iranian language tree....

This seems to be part of a wide scale campaign to disconnect Iranians from their rightful history in that part of the world.

I notice this because it has happened to my people (Armenians) as well..

get used to the fact that we Aryans have been here before you and we will be here after you....

and stop distorting and defrauding known historical facts...I don't even want to look at the Ararat talk page...I know I will get too upset

-- 99.231.215.49 ( talk) 04:34, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names). All the non-English names come in alphabetical order. So please check the rules before making changes to the lead. The lead is written in accordance with the Wikipedia rules. Grand master 05:59, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

It is mildly confusing to me, a layman, to see Paratethys mentioned, then Tethys. Perhaps a brief explanation of the relationship in the hydrology section, or a decision to use just one (probably Paratethys). -- Richardson mcphillips ( talk) 18:48, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

a map showing more of eurasia would help people know where this body of water is. The current maps are too close-up for that. Kdammers ( talk) 06:32, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

I am considering to partition the history section into two; one on geographical history (on the scale of millions of years) and human history (on the scale of thousands). I think it seems appropriate, but does anyone have objections? - Rosywounds ( talk) 03:33, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Sure, go for it. This article probably needs somewhat better organization in general. Vmenkov ( talk) 10:07, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Splitting Human History into a separate section has certainly been an improvement. Perhaps the next task should be rearranging all section into a more logical order. Right now we have this:

1. Geological history
2. Geography
3. Cities near the Caspian Sea
4. Islands
5. Human history

  – A couple of things concerning human history in the Caspian Region
      – Alexander the Great proposed building a fleet in this area.
[1]
      – He subdued the Mardians, a fierce although poor people who lived in this region at the time. 
[2]
          – He entered the region from Hectamapolys, which is to the South west, and then went west along the coast to subdue these peoples. 
          – He ordered his Leutenant Parmenion to come up from Ectabana and block off all the exits from the south, while he attacked these people with various attachments and dispersed these people from the west/coast.
          – It was as a result of this conquest that this region was added to what was traditionally the Persian Satrapy of Tarpursia Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the 
help page).
      – A more exact map of the route of the exact path Alexander took along the southern Caspian. 
[3]

SteveMooreSmith3 ( talk) 07:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

1. Fauna
2. Hydrocarbon resources
3. Existing and proposed canals
4. International disputes
5. Characteristics and ecology
6. Transportation
7. Freezing

It seems like it would be more logical to have "natural history"/physical geography sections next to each other - e.g. something like this:

1. Geography
2. Islands
3. Geological history
4. Characteristics and ecology
5. Freezing
6. Fauna

The history/politics is another logical group

1. Human history
2. International disputes

And then the economic geography, if you wish:

1. Cities near the Caspian Sea
2. Hydrocarbon resources
3. Transportation
4. Existing and proposed canals

Obviously, there may be other plans - so I don't want to do rearrangement myself, but rather let someone with more interest in the article to do it. It would be good idea to compare it with the organization of high-profile articles on other seas and lakes, e.g. Mediterranean Sea or the Great Lakes. It would be interesting to find other sea/lake articles that have been labeled " featured" or " good", and see how they are organized; however, it looks like there no good or featured articles about seas or really big lakes; Great Salt Lake may be the biggest lake with a "good" article. Vmenkov ( talk) 00:33, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Lakes does mention a few (although one is an artificial lake). I think Human history could be expanded a bit. Cities/Islands seem like they could be included as subsections of Geography instead. They should also be turned into prose; the lists are a bit excessive and include a lot of trivial cities that don't even have major ports. Freezing can be a side note in the lakes description, but doesn't really merit its own section (its only a couple sentences long). The article does still have a lot of work, I'll try to give it more attention considering that it is a vital article for an encyclopedia. - Rosywounds ( talk) 00:43, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think you need to separate out the history. There are the chapters in the box and most people click on the segment that they are interested in. As long as chapters are up there in the box, the articles can be long and elaborate; one might click on other topics that one hadn't been so interested in before.

NEW DEVELOPMENT? I came here today because only days ago the Iranian Ambassador in Russia confirmed that a canal project from the Caspian Sea to the Persian Gulf is being studied. As fanciful as this sounds we all know that with enough money and will you can do anything. This topic ought to be monitored because I have the feeling this will develop beyond a pipe dream. 58.174.193.2 ( talk) 04:24, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

What's the point in using this obscure term that few general readers will understand? Sca ( talk) 21:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

It means lake, or more specifically, of and having to do with lakes. I know what it means. SteveMooreSmith3 ( talk) 07:42, 10 June 2011 (UTC) Then why not use the word "lake" here? If it means something more, than it needs to be explained either here or at the article it is linked to, where it does not appear. IN the meantime I've changed the link to the wiktionary entry that explains the word. -- Richardson mcphillips ( talk) 20:40, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Caspian Sea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{ dead link}} tag to http://www.caspianenvironment.org/newsite/Caspian-Background.htm
• Added {{ dead link}} tag to http://www.caspianenvironment.org/newsite/Caspian-EnvironmentalIssues.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.iran-daily.com/1385/2757/html/focus.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110514134103/http://www.iranair.com/site/779/default.aspx to http://www.iranair.com/site/779/default.aspx
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.iran-daily.com/1385/2717/html/focus.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.brtsis.com/rrubbbb.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724171008/http://www.caspage.citg.tudelft.nl/project.html to http://www.caspage.citg.tudelft.nl/project.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{ Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:25, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

″′′′′′′′′′′′′°°°°°°°°°°°≠≠≠≠≠≠≠≥≥≥≥≤≤≥−−−±±÷×←←←→§§§§ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.251.250 ( talk) 23:46, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

The second paragraph of the article says, "The sea bed in the southern part [of the Caspian Sea] reaches as low as 1023 m below sea level, which is the second lowest natural depression on earth after Lake Baikal (−1180 m)."

Isn't the "lowest natural depresion on earth" the Mariana Trench? The Mariana Trench "reaches a maximum-known depth of 10,994 metres [below sea level? This sould be stated.]".

Madang1965 ( talk) 14:31, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm sure it means the lowest non-Oceanic depression, as not just the Mariana Trench, but most of the Ocean floor is deeper than that. Not sure on the best way to word that. Kmusser ( talk) 19:09, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

I think you have it there, just say non-Oceanic depression instead of depression. Rjbcollege ( talk) 17:00, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Is the Caspian Sea considered the "Sea of Shinar?" Babylon had an area referred to as Shinar, and a sea was not far from it, not sure if this was the same place or not.

Twillisjr ( talk) 02:15, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

I shouldn't think so. It's not particularly close to Mesopotamia. Bazonka ( talk) 09:40, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Possibly the Black sea, it flooded just before biblical times, before that it was a giant fresh water lake, the fresh water is still there, in a layer deep at the bottom of the black sea separated by a deadly layer of chemical reactions between the fresh and salt water. They could either be referring to the Plains of shinar as the Pontic steppe. (there are no plains in Mesopotamia)If you look at the migration of Ashkenazi jews it's been mapped by ISOGG and family tree dna, they spread from Ukraine between 4000-3200 bc and carried haplogroup R1a(the Aryan/indoeuropean) male linage in the first Aryan migration. They were likely many clans and tribes moving together and settling along the way, the western group became the Germanic people, the eastern group became the Indus valley and Vedic Indians, Ashkenazi jews, several arab tribes, the sumerians, etc. If you look up the Tartaria tablets or the Vinca script of the Danube river valley you'll notice that it's identical to proto-Sumerian which appears 1000 years afterwards. The Hebrew calendar also begins at the exact time period of the Aryan invasion just a few centuries after the black sea flooded(which was a sudden event in what was a highly populated area, btw "turkey" was more connected to Europe at that time physically as well as culturally and genetically. The turks didn't arrive until the 7th century AD. Names such as Ari are also dead giveaways for the Aryan or Arian roots of Judaism. All Ashkenazi jews carry Aryan haplogroup R1a but their line now has a subclade called CTS-6(it branches like a tree) If you compare proto Germanic or Nordic script with Hebrew you'll notice some similarities as well, one character or "rune" looks exactly like a menorah cut in half down the middle. The menorah represents the tree of life, the holy tree there is also a tree of life/holy tree in Germanic folk religious traditions("myths") called Yggdrasil. There are more similarities but I'm not going to spend hours talking about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.17.170.70 ( talk) 08:01, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

I wish you'd not have spent any time at all with that nonsense on the Talk Pages. Egads! 50.111.22.12 ( talk) 19:31, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

QUOTE:

Most tadpole gobies (Benthophilus) are only found in the Caspian Sea basin.

Well, which is it?
–Most of the tadpoles are found there...
or
–The tadpoles are found only there...

It can't be both! -- Picapica ( talk) 17:37, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

If we connet Caspian sea with black sea and Mediterranean Sea by river without using lock . And what will happen to ecosystem of Caspian sea King of troy ( talk) 15:19, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

"These lead to horizontal differences in temperature, salinity, and ecology." What does this actually mean? Is it actually 'horizontal', or is this intended to mean that the temperature, salinity, and ecology vary dramatically with latitude? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eljamoquio ( talk • contribs) 03:39, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

I didn't pen it. But it scarcely needs a defence. Your confusion results in your being (as is very common these days) stuck to just set phrases in English. English is an à la carte menu. If someone said "vertical differences" you would perceive that as easy. Horizontal refers to latitude and longtitude. Read very slowly and you will see the eastern drain lagoon mentioned clearly at about 20 times saltier, makes for a salty shore right next to there (or it wouldn't be so salty, see dilution as an article; and the southern shore having no main inflows that side is also saltier, plus all the other variations that are based on these directions). If people really are so staid, boring as to need set phrases these days everyone should just despair.- Adam37 Talk 20:42, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

I will go on. A decent map, read (past tense) would show the greenness, rivers, and often, moisture of the west side. Very dry opposite. Your use of 'actually mean?' is very soundbite and limited in purpose. After all, it has a certain thickness about it. It means what is says on the tin. As Betty Boothroyd says, where she is from they [can] call a spade a shovel. A certain latitude in your vocabulary is due. Perhaps listen to some Philip Palmer.- Adam37 Talk 21:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

As these things obviously differ by depth too in every lake, I would prefer "spatial contrast". But let's agree that would go past a fair few readers' imaginations, being outwith of a helpful set phrase, and verging on WP:VAGUE/truism, they'll critique it out of existence.- Adam37 Talk 21:29, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Both the wikipedia page for The Black Sea & The Caspian Sea make the claim: "world's largest inland body of water" Hopefully this could be definitively clarified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riquez~enwiki ( talk • contribs) 01:11, 3 January 2021 (UTC)