Talk:Tropic Seamount

Frontiers source
This looks like a substantive source but from a somewhat dodgy publication. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 21:11, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Moroccan claims
I am not sure if I would use this source to support anything in the article as it doesn't show any maps and does not mention Tropic Seamount at all. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:18, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

The information provided is false and biased. Jason Dasco (talk) 09:36, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no evidence that either is the case. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:49, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

(Related)Western Sahara vs. Morocco
Regarding the IP edits I have reverted these few weeks: Sources use "Western Sahara" and since it's being used as a geographical concept using that makes more sense anyhow. Western Sahara does not suggest that there is a consensus on Wikipedia that WS should be considered part of Morocco anyhow. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:56, 5 February 2020 (UTC) Quoting my own edit summary on one of these reversions, on the advice of

Does Morocco claim these are part of this EEZ?
This is in the article: as of 2017 Morocco also laid an EEZ claim over the area.

However, the second source does not mention Tropic Seamount at all and I am not sure if Various observers say that Morocco’s plans could be part of a wider strategy – one through which it claims sovereignty of the Tropic Seamount – a submerged volcano discovered in 2016, which is rich in rare minerals that help to drive the modern world economy. in the first is equivalent to Morocco claiming "yes, this is part of our EEZ". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:02, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

On Morocco vs Spain/Canary Islands
Can the IP editors who keep changing places from "Spain" or "Canary Islands" to "Morocco" discuss their changes here? Most sources do discuss the seamount in the context of the Canary Islands, not of Morocco - probably because they tend to discuss geology. And it would be nice if folks provide sources and use proper grammar; some edits look like sloppy cut-and-paste jobs. This seems to be a nationalistic editing pattern of some sort, but Wikipedia isn't really a place for arguing about this. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:53, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree. It would be helpful if folks find a holistic reliable source weighing on the matter, to outline that, pending an agreement among both sides, all this ruckus about potential EEZ extensions presumably paves the way for a frozen conflict of competing claims (overimposed on the Western Sahara brouhaha between Morocco and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic) more than anything. Regards.--Asqueladd (talk) 11:11, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Is it possible the seamount could be in a disputed area? Volcanoguy 17:42, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It could be, but none of the sources I use mentions a geopolitical dispute and frankly the back-and-forth editing seems driven by driveby IPs, which makes me think it's not a genuine dispute yet but simply online nationalism. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:49, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, an IP editor presented this source. I am kind of iffy on using newspaper articles at all but if we are going to discuss the "dispute" that's a better source than the rest. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:49, 15 August 2022 (UTC)