Talk:Marine chemistry

Evaluation of article:
The extremophile section does not include any citations, and could use further development. The diagram included in this section could be located closer to the related text, and should be cited as well.

The section on climate change is very brief, and while it doesn't seem biased, it is outdated and does not include significant reference to ocean acidification. The mention of a proposal to add lime to the ocean seems out of place and overemphasized in a paragraph of three sentences. --Ocean540 (talk) 17:29, 24 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Removed lime Chidgk1 (talk) 17:20, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Bias
The current article seems to be totally preoccupied with the prejudice that mankind would change the climate and ocean chemistry as well. Both is not the case. The sources are poor. The entire text should be thrown our and rewritten by an expert. --84.56.13.75 (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Name
It seems to me that this topic is much more commonly known as "Marine chemistry". I propose that it be moved to that title. --Bduke (talk) 23:44, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

I don't have a strong opinion on the name of the article but this seems to be the place to discuss it. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:17, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, I think there is some degree of consensus against Ocean chemistry as the title. I don't have a strong opinion between Marine chemistry and Chemical oceanography. If the latter, the lede will need significant revision, as the lede content from the source article was merged in as its own section, rather than being incorporated into the lede of the merged article (of course, this can still happen). Mdewman6 (talk) 16:39, 20 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I agree with Mdewman6. Perhaps in the first instance the merge should be made to Marine chemistry, with this being positioned as a branch of chemistry. But there is also a branch of oceanography which looks at chemistry. Oceanographers working with oceanographic ships have their own subdiscipline called Chemical oceanography, which together with its own conventions and specialised sampling techniques uses terms such as DOC, POC, DIC, PIC, POM, TIC and TOC. There may be a case for reinstating Chemical oceanography as an additional article, though this article might need input from somone with a working knowlege of the area. — Epipelagic (talk) 00:38, 22 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I also agree as I live not far from the sea but thousands of km from the ocean. As this discussion was started in 2020 I am closing and have asked tech help (a page mover) to rename Chidgk1 (talk) 16:47, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Merge update: April 2021
I propose to merge Ocean Chemistry and Marine Chemist into Chemical Oceanography. I have added merge from templates to the Ocean chemistry and Marine chemist articles, and a merge to template to Chemical Oceanography. I am in favor of this merger, which will improve the quality of information on Chemical Oceanography and Wikipedia as a whole. I recognize Wikiproject Limnology and Oceanography as the relevant Wikiproject for this subject, and I have proposed this merger on that page as well. The history of merge requests on the talk page of Chemical Oceanography indicates a consensus for this action, which I propose to be carried out by the WPL&O community pending further discussion. OHClNaMg (talk) 22:39, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose merging Chemical oceanography into Ocean chemistry. I think the content in Chemical oceanography can easily be explained in the context of Ocean chemistry, and a merger would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Ocean chemistry. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:30, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree. It should be merged, but it will need some careful work by someone who understands ocean chemistry. I am a retired chemist but I know nothing about ocean chemistry. --Bduke (talk) 06:42, 18 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Weak support. I think a merge would be fine. I wonder if the merged page shouldn't be at chemical oceanography instead, for instance, Marine physics redirects to Physical oceanography. But Geological oceanography redirects to Marine geology, while Biological oceanography and Marine biology are separate articles, obviously due to the immensity of the latter topic. Note that I just blanked and redirected Marine chemist to Ocean chemistry, due to the plagiarism and niche use of the term described in the stub. Note also the previous merge discussion at Talk:Chemical_oceanography. Lastly, absolutely Ocean chemistry should be moved to Marine chemistry if that's the article that remains. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:03, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Support that a merger would be good. I have no opinion about the exact merger to where but my overall impression is that there are too many separate, closely related articles on this topic. By the way, Chidgk1, the ping didn't work for me, not sure if that multiple ping option that you used works like that? EMsmile (talk) 09:26, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I just copied the ping syntax from Merging as writing on a lot of talk pages is too tedious so I only wrote on main projects. Which is maybe why did not want to do this merge and asked me to - the procedure should be much more automated - I tried easy-merge tool a while ago but it was too confusing which parts of the process it did and which still had to be done manually. Cannot remember where that tool came from or whether I wrote to WikiProject Merge. Maybe "u" will inform  ? Chidgk1 (talk) 11:14, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Support, but also supporting the note that we need to have someone who can navigate the complexities of merging the topics correctly -- I don't think the chemical oceanography article will have lasting maintainers though, Sadads (talk) 17:57, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Support that a merger would be appropriate. But not into Ocean chemistry. The merged page should either be Chemical oceanography or Marine chemistry, as Mdewman6 notes. I volunteer to do the work of improving the final article, as I have relevant expertise. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:04, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Conditional support, I support a merge, but to Chemical oceanography and not to Ocean chemistry. This merge would keep alignment with the other subdivisions of Oceanography (Physical oceanography, Biological oceanography and Geological oceanography). — Epipelagic (talk) 00:52, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
 * , to be clear, Geological oceanography is a redirect to Marine geology. A requested move discussion could consider moving that to the oceanography sub-field page as well, perhaps depending on consensus here. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:51, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
 * , to be clear, Geological oceanography is a redirect to Marine geology. A requested move discussion could consider moving that to the oceanography sub-field page as well, perhaps depending on consensus here. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:51, 20 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Oops... the merge discussion has been closed and a merge has already been made to Ocean chemistry. According to WP:MERGECLOSE, merge discussions shouldn't normally be closed unless one week or more has elapsed and there has been no discussion or there is unanimous consent to merge. Only two days have elapsed, and while there may have been unanimous consent to merge, there has not been anything like unanimous consent to merge to ocean chemistry. — Epipelagic (talk) 07:28, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll be happy to rename the article once the name discussion above has concluded. Sorry I forgot about the time limit. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:59, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Rename to what?
I see you closed the informal discussion above with consensus to rename, but rename to which option? I don't think this was ever decided. My inclination was to move to Marine chemistry, as obviously an improvement over Ocean chemistry, and then an requested move could consider whether or not to move to Chemical oceanography, but the multi-step process would make a mess of the redirect history from the merge, so better to just decide on the best name an execute. Once a name is chosen, I can execute the page swap, but I don't think we're there yet. Mdewman6 (talk) 17:18, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I see you brought it to technical requests and someone has just actioned it for you. I guess then if anyone thinks the page should instead be at Chemical oceanography, they can initiate a requested move to address that question. The option remains to create a new article at Chemical oceanography (WP:SPLIT) in the future that would be an improvement over what was merged. Mdewman6 (talk) 17:23, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * But lastly, if you ping people in a discussion, you should give them 7 days to reply. There is no need for that much haste, as nothing on WP is as urgent as it may seem. Being bold is fine, but if there is a discussion, let it run its course and be patient rather than hastily closing discussions so something can happen faster. Mdewman6 (talk) 17:25, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: EEB 4611-Biogeochemical Processes-Spring 2024
— Assignment last updated by LynSchwendy (talk) 03:29, 14 May 2024 (UTC)