Talk:Sahara pump theory

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Weather: Climate Mid‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Climate task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Unreliable source

Here is a recent archaeological discovery http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26841410 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.104.199.230 (talk) 20:21, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested fusion

The Sahara Pump Theory and North African Climatic Cycles could possibly benefit from a fusion. They seem to refer to similar content.John D. Croft (talk) 15:04, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reference to broken DOI

A reference was recently added to this article using the Cite DOI template. The citation bot tried to expand the citation, but could not access the specified DOI. Please check that the DOI doi:10.1073͞pnas.0510792103 has been correctly entered. If the DOI is correct, it is possible that it has not yet been entered into the CrossRef database. Please complete the reference by hand here. The script that left this message was unable to track down the user who added the citation; it may be prudent to alert them to this message. Thanks, Citation bot 2 (talk) 01:29, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 01:33, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of clarity

I reckon to be able to follow popular science articles, but this entry had me beat.

It needs re-organising to make it more coherent, starting with an explanation of why this theory is called the Sahara "pump", and then explaining whether this is a one-off event as seems implied by the first paragraph,

"Regardless of the aridity of the greater Sahara, migration along the river corridor was halted when, during a desert phase 1.8-0.8 million years ago (Ma), the Nile ceased to flow completely[2] and possibly flowed only temporarily in other periods[3] due to Nubian Swell uplift."

or a repeating one, as in the second section:

"During periods of a wet or "Green Sahara", the Sahara and Arabia become a savannah grassland"

On re-reading, perhaps the best answer would to put this section labelled "Mechanism" as the first "summary" section, as it seems rather clearer than the existing bit.

I'm not inclined to try changing it myself, as I'm definitely not a historical climatologist, but if this article is intended to be read by general readers, or those with some historical but no scientific training, then it needs:

  a summary passage/definition section at the beginning

  a little less of those terms which will only be understood by those with a text book to hand.

  fewer casual references to "Nubian Swell Uplift" may be useful to geology (??) undergraduates, but not to the rest of us - at least in the top section.

  lists of animals are probably excessive at this level of detail, given that the point of the article is - presumably - the scientific event.

As a general point should Wiki as a whole settle for the Ka/Ma system or the BP system, rather than mixing them?

Jorvikian (talk) 11:38, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would be good to find a source that explains how these changes in the Sahara could act as a pump. Kortoso (talk) 23:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hypothesis?

In the intro, it is stated that we are dealing with a hypothesis; yet in the rest of the article it is treated as though it were a universally accepted theory. I am puzzled as to how certain this is - is there evidence for or against it? Has there been criticism of the hypothesis? Nikolaj1905 (talk) 19:07, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sahara pump theory. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:45, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]