Talk:Chibanian

link in references section is dead
the link the references section is dead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.72.21.76 (talk) 18:14, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for finding this problem. I have changed the link to an archived version. GeoWriter (talk) 22:41, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Chibanian or Ionian
Google Translation of a web page http://www.sankei.com/smp/life/news/171113/lif1711130023-s1.html in Japanese linked by User:John3825 to supposedly support their change of Ionian to Chibanian on 13 November 2017:

To the birth of "Chiba Era" in Earth history Japan's first geological age name, Italy breaks at the international judging Tivanian 2017.11.13 14: 01 update ''On the 13th, it was learned from a stake in the stakeholders that the age of about 770,000 to 126,000 years ago in the history of the earth was named "Tivanian" (Chiba Era). A Japanese research team aiming for naming, applying for a stratum of Chiba prefecture to the international conference as a reference base of this age, broke competing Italy in the primary examination. Also announce it in the week. If it is decided officially it will be a great achievement that the name of Japan will be attached to the geological age for the first time.'' ''The Japanese team and two Italian teams applied for the International Geological Science Federation in June each year, the stratum of the reference site, which is the international standard of this age. The working group composed of experts from each country examined and voted on the 10th of this month, Japan was selected as a candidate place with the support of more than 60% of the whole.'' Three further stages of examination are expected until the official approval expected in next year, but in the past the conclusion of the working group covered only the exceptional case, which was virtually settled. ''In Japan, the National Polar Research Institute and teams such as Ibaraki Univ. Apply for the stratum of Ichihara city, Chiba prefecture as the reference place. We advocated the age name of Tibanian meaning the Chiba era in Latin. Italy had applied for two southern strata, aiming at the age name of "Ionian".''

This translation shows that only a recommendation of the working group has been approved. This is still unofficial until it has been ratified/approved by the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS) and International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS). Until that offical approval is agreed sometime in the future, any official change to Chibanian is speculation and premature. Wikipedia is supposed to state facts not speculation about what may happen in the future. I recommend that User:John3825's edits about the change of name to Chibanian should be reverted (again). I have already reverted them once but User:John3825 applied his changes again. I will not get into an edit war. My comments also apply to User:John3825's edits about the Chibanian at Pleistocene and Template:Quaternary (period). GeoWriter (talk) 17:06, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Ionian section
There is only the briefest mention of Ionian in reference material. It seems to be specific to marine deposits in the Italian stages. Is this an important thing to mention in this article?--Akrasia25 (talk) 13:56, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I think that the Ionian became really internationally significant only around 2008/2009, which is obviously after publication of the 2004 book you mention. I'll have a look in some more recent publications that I possess to see if I can find some source references for the existing unsourced Ionian text. Despite it falling out of favour for global correlation, I think the Ionian could continue to be included in this article for two reasons - (1) its historical significance as a once favoured GSSP candidate and (2) its continued status as a European regional subdivision of the Pleistocene. — GeoWriter (talk) 17:03, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

N-th stage/division of Pleistocene
Since time flows from origin to destination, this is the third (not second) stage in a sequence within the Pleistocene, after the Gelasian and the Calabrian. The Eos source supporting the first sentence of the article also doesn't explicitly mention an ordinal. Wakari07 (talk) 09:36, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Dates
I've been trying to make a chart of all this, and I'm getting very confused. As I understand from other Wikipedia entries:

• The Chibanian is the last stage of the Pleistocene • The Pleistocene lasted from 2,580,000 BP to 11,700BP

Why, then is the end of the Chibanian given as 126,000 BP? That leaves a huge hole from -126000 to -11,700.

Sorry if I'm missing something, I'm a complete beginner at this stuff.

Paul Magnussen (talk) 00:04, 28 February 2021 (UTC)