Talk:Vatnajökull
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
|
 |
Contents |
[edit] Not largest anymore
Austfonna on Nordaustlandet, Svalbard in Norway is bigger in area. But Vatnajökull is bigger in volume.
Numbers: Vatnajökull is 8100 km2. In 1980 it was 8300 and in 1958 8538. 400m thick in average. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]
Austfonna in Norway is 8200 km2, slightly less than 300m thick in average, so Vatnajökull has a greater volume: [12] [13] [14]
--KRISTAGAα-ω 11:43, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Pronounciation
Are you sure those IPA stress markers are not misplaced? Currently, they indicate a primary stress on the second and on the last syllable. For what I know, Icelandic, like all Germanic languages, favors stress on the initial syllable. --Salleman 10:14, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
In Icelandic pronounciation the stress is ALWAYS on the fyrst syllable Pési 17:20, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Surely the caption on the last photo should be Jökulsárlón
[edit] Hvannadalshnjúkur
It is 2,110 m high according to new measurements -- see [15] and our page about it. Stefán Ingi 14:12, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
- My bad, I gave the worng number here, it is 2,110 m. I will correct it. Stefán Ingi 09:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "possibly"
How about "likely because of. . ."? Possibly conveys that this is just sort of a guess. Haven't the causes of recession been studied and resonably established? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.255.161.218 (talk • contribs) .
- If you have a source that says that's the likely reason, then by all means add it and strengthen the wording. As it is, it's bordering on weasel words. —Keenan Pepper 23:45, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
