Talk:Shatsky Rise

Tamu Massif
This article states that Shatsky Rise "includes the largest volcano yet discovered on Earth, the Tamu Massif." No source is given for this statement (although there is a reference in the map infobox). News and popular science websites have stated that Tamu Massif is the largest volcano on Earth, e.g. New Giant Volcano Below Sea Is Largest in the World and The Solar System's second-largest volcano found hiding on Earth, both published on 5 September 2013.

The media interest was triggered by a paper by Sager et al. on the Nature Geoscience website, published on 5 September 2013 but corrected on 6 September 2013. The abstract of this Nature Geoscience article states "We suggest that the Tamu Massif could be the largest single volcano on Earth and that it is comparable in size to the largest volcano in the Solar System, Olympus Mons on Mars."

Sager et al. suggesting/claiming that "the Tamu Massif could be the largest single volcano on Earth" (bold added by me) and the media telling us that the Tamu Massif is the largest volcano on Earth, are two different things. Tamu Massif is larger than Mauna Loa in Hawaii, but is Tamu Massif a single volcano? It could be, but we still cannot say for sure. The scientific jury is still out, because it has not studied the two-day-old claim yet. The article by Sager et al. is more the start of the process of assessment than its end. Assessment by other scientists of evidence presented in the Sager et al. paper could show that Tamu Massif is not what has been claimed. Tamu Massif may not actually be the largest volcano on Earth. The media have prematurely reported the suggestions about Tamu Massif as fact. To repeat this in the Shatsky Rise, Tamu Massif and Mauna Loa articles on Wikipedia is also premature. Until the findings are confirmed by other geologists, claims about Tamu Massif being the largest volcano on Earth should be described in the Wikipedia articles as a suggestion/claim/possibilty, not a fact. It's too early for Wikipedia to treat Sager et al's claim as fact. I suggest that the Shatsky Rise article in Wikipedia should be changed to reflect this uncertainty. GeoWriter (talk) 22:12, 7 September 2013 (UTC)