Talk:African humid period

Younger Dryas category

Is it really correct to list Category:Younger Dryas on this page? The Younger Dryas is a pause in the AHP, not a continuation. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 18:46, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

I was not searching for continuations, but for articles which either place the Younger Dryas in its palaeontological and archaeological context, or provide explanations for its causes. Dimadick (talk) 18:50, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

On the length tag

I'd like to dispute the length tag on the grounds that this topic is extremely broad and covers a number of aspects across several different countries, fields of science and ages. That and as discussed in the archive, it does not neatly split into various topics. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:53, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

The article is currently written in a way that is broader than the topic, and the topic can certainly be covered in a more concise way - for example avoiding examplefarms. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:14, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, deliberately so, to give a bit of context of what came before and what else occurred at the same time. The examples of e.g lakes were picked with a reason, too - the lakes in question have had dedicated studies to them. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 05:17, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

But we don't need to report every lake that's been studied - we're meant to be providing a broad overview of the subject. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:18, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I am inclined to think that listing lakes that were studied is an appropriate level of detail. Details on each lake on the other hand would be excessive. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 05:59, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Russian source

This source discusses the speciation of the Guinea tilapia, but it's too long to readily translate. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 20:14, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Thoughts on "How language can be a path away from neo-colonialism in geoscience"?

I've introduced this source in the article but I am not excited by it. Putting aside for a moment that the term "African humid period" was a) coined in 2000 by deMenocal and not by Nicholson and Flohn 1980 which don't use the term and b) there are so many manifestations outside of North Africa that such a rename motion has gained little traction so far, I am not sure if this study carries the weight to argue that the term is neo-colonial. Certainly not without a "allegedly" before it which strikes me as questionable too. I am just not sure whether to default to inclusion or exclusion. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 20:11, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

I see that @Herostratus: has removed this part. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I can't read the article beyond the first few sentences, but it looks like a polemic and a pretty incendiary one at that. Apparently "African humid period" is racist or something. If it's misleading or too broad or whatever, that'd be one thing, but racist is just over the top. I don't know what the authors recommend instead, and if they have a concrete suggestion I suppose we could put it in the Terminology and use the article to ref that (altho these people might not be notable enough, so maybe not). But the political screed stuff, seems too fringe to me. Herostratus (talk) 04:25, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Herostratus: It seems like there are non-paywalled copies here. The pertinent part to AHP is Another example, which is rooted in colonial-era treatment of colonized areas as uninhabited and homogenous 2 , is the ‘African Humid Period’. This Holocene climate perturbation has been recognized across mainly northern Africa for over 100 years but this phrasing first appears in the 1980s 6. The term is problematic, as instead of referring to a section of the continent, indeed initially just the Sahara 6, the whole of Africa is invoked. Lumping together 54 countries, eight climatic regions and 30 million km 2 into a single, simple, unknowable entity harks back to colonial thinking. Instead, we could simply refer to this period as the ‘northern African Humid Phase’. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:47, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Ah, thank you. Well, they do have a suggestion "northern African Humid Phase", which is entirely reasonable. We could use that article as a source for the statement "some scientists have instead used and recommended... "Northern African humid period". After all, they are correct in saying "The term is problematic, as instead of referring to a section of the continent, indeed initially just the Sahara 6, the whole of Africa is invoked. Lumping together 54 countries, eight climatic regions and 30 million km 2...", altho I don't think it is super confusing cos reading a couple-few sentences in to any material on the subject makes it pretty clear what is being talked about.

But, ascribing this to an imperialist mindset is just such arrant nonsense that I'm not sure that these people are serious enough to have any standing to comment on anything not directly in their exact areas of technical scientific expertise, defined narrowly. Yes I know the West has acted badly in a lot of places, but this here is a science article.

Anyway, they didn't recommend "Northern African humid period", the recommended "northern African humid period", and for all I know capitalizing "Northern African" as a proper noun rather than using "northern Africa" as a mere descriptive phrase indicates a desire to divide the continent into formally separate sections which is racist or something. Who knows? It's tiring to try to keep up with this stuff and so I'd just as soon not include these people at all. Herostratus (talk) 21:41, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

For the interested

This sauce speculates that the Los Chocoyos eruption of Lake Atitlán might have induced a significant greening of the Sahara 84,000 years ago. Via Mediterranean rainfall and not the monsoon, however. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:07, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Green or "green"

@Mukogodo: I still must contest this formatting change. Most of the world does not put the green in scare quotes, even if it probably should, and the distinction between savanna and green strikes me as overly literal. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:28, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

6,000–5,000 years ago during the Piora Oscillation cold period.

A "PIORA" cold period is very much debated, and above all, never ocurred in that time, perhaps Piora I started at 3400 BC, if at all.HJJHolm (talk) 09:42, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

3,400 BC is 5,400 years ago so within Menocal's timespan, though? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:22, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

National Geographic September 1924

Does someone have a working version of the article that says on which page the savannah animals are mentioned. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:55, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Intro

The Introduction is by far to detailed. On the other hand, we need a chapters about datings of the beginning and the end.HJJHolm (talk) 06:51, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that the intro is too detailed at all, sorry. It seems to be a proper level of detail. There is already a chapter about the dating of the ending (6.1 Chronology) and the dates of the beginning aren't particularly controversial and don't need a chapter. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:37, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Length/citation number

So, currently the article has 965 citations and with my annual update the number will likely grow. @KyleSirTalksAlot: has flagged the article for excessive citations so at some point a split will have to be done, but someone has to write the split articles. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:54, 28 October 2024 (UTC)