Talk:Wadden Sea

AFAIK the Dutch and Danish Wadden Sea do not have national park status. Therefore I removed the corresponding sentence. Please correct me, if I should be wrong. -- Cordyph 14:02 17 Jun 2003 (UTC)

i think, the picture shows only a part of the wadden sea. it should be mentioned or can someone add the northern part?

Is Wadden Sea really the common name in English for all of the area? I would assume it is appropriate for the Dutch part as a translation of Waddenzee. But it seems a bit odd to use a semi-Dutch term when it comes to the Wattenmeer (German) and Vadehavet (Danish). --Sasper 02:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it seems Wadden Sea is a well-established name in English. A lot of traditional placenames in the English language are semi-foreign and a confusion of forms, so there is nothing odd in that. I searched in the Library of Congress catalogue and I found a publication by a Danish biologist from 1951 using the word "Waddensea" and several ones written by Dutch authors ("Wadden Sea") from the 1950s and onwards. Since the 1970s or 1980s the term has been common for both Dutch, Danish and German publications in English. --Sasper (talk) 11:55, 8 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm not completely sure, but I think the area is relative new and was created in the 17th century, when most of the old coast was spewpt away. But it may be possible, that there was a similar situation before, at the edge of the old shoreline. See Grote Mandenke. The german article on it is much more detailed http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zweite_Marcellusflut MartinKal 13:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Well, the present situation was reached in the 14th century. Earlier flooding at the end of the last Ice Age created peat land, that was in turn destroyed by soil shrinkage due to human cultivation combined with rising sealevels.--MWAK 08:41, 28 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

81.11.206.47 (talk) 19:20, 30 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

The deepest points are where the inlets are. I remember a claim that the deepest point is between Den Helder and Texel in the extreme west. The wadden are are constantly changing, so I don't know if this is still true and even if it is it may not hold forever. However, at these inlets the Wadden Sea is the least wad-ish and these points are maybe not that interesting.

Looking at the question another way, another answer could be the coastline at low tide, but that would exclude the many creeks which do perform a central role in the Wadden Sea's tidal dynamic. And where does a creek stop being a creek and become sea? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.61.180.106 (talk) 11:49, 1 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Wadden Sea's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "unesco":

• From UNESCO: "City of Quito – UNESCO World Heritage". UNESCO. Archived from the original on 7 May 2009. Retrieved 30 April 2010.
• From World Heritage Site: "States Parties – UNESCO World Heritage Centre". UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Archived from the original on 26 May 2020. Retrieved 18 March 2018.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 15:19, 26 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Not a reply, because bot, but a note to editors: this reference wasn't orphaned, it was already invalid when it was added. I managed to find a reference online though.

Rediscovery of Rungholt, lost in Jan 1362 inundation : [1] (in English) - Rod57 (talk) 23:12, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply