Talk:Iceberg

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Antarctica B‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Antarctica, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Antarctica 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.AntarcticaWikipedia:WikiProject AntarcticaTemplate:WikiProject AntarcticaAntarctica articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Geography B‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography 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.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles

B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Glaciers B‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Glaciers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Glaciers 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.GlaciersWikipedia:WikiProject GlaciersTemplate:WikiProject GlaciersGlacier articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:Vital article

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 91 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Growler?

Why no mention? Sea packs and growlers are a distinct danger to shipping. 86.129.68.115 (talk) 18:40, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A weird sentence.

According to NASA expert:
"...icebergs are moved by winds and currents, drifting either north or south toward Earth's equator, where they eventually melt." So far everything is clear to me.
Now, Wiki reads:
"Though usually confined by winds and currents to move close to the coast , the largest icebergs recorded [...] "
Hmm... weird English, weird logic. Please can you translate it from English to English? 85.193.218.118 (talk) 03:28, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about my snap opinion. The first part of the sentence, when isolated, looks good, but has nothing to do with "the largest icebergs". I have decided to split this sentence. 85.193.218.118 (talk) 23:19, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch. Thank you for the correction. Bede735 (talk) 23:31, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

90% underwater

In the introduction it says 90% of an iceberg is underwater. I know this as an urban legend but is it really true? Can we have a source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.13.72.28 (talk) 06:53, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That is not an urban legend, but a simple fact comparable to saying the sky is blue on a clear day. Drop an ice cube in a glass of water to see for yourself the proportion of ice above and below the surface. If you want to mimic the salinity of sea water, stir in a couple of teaspoons of salt, and observe the difference. I have removed the "citation needed" tag from the lead section. Just plain Bill (talk) 14:46, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's imprecise. 90% seem to be too good to be true, it's something you teach children at school but by far not encyclopedic. As you pointed out yourself, salinity plays a role. That's an unstable value. The article currently says 91%. Where's the source for that? --88.65.127.73 (talk) 18:05, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it's imprecise; the question is imprecise. The figure varies with the density of the sea- or freshwater, its temperature, salinity, and so on, and the purity, gas content, mineral inclusions etc of the ice, and how many polar bears are hitching a ride or seals trying to lift it the ice from below. Not to mention wind and wave activity. Not every measurement of buoyancy takes place in a laboratory at STP with purified, standardised materials. Just plain Bill was quite correct to remove the tag. JonRichfield (talk) 05:21, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How long to melt?

I was hoping to learn how long it takes for an Antarctic iceberg to melt. I read in an unreliable source 100s of years for the big flat-top types. -- GreenC 19:40, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"ever since . . . 1912"

The article states, "icebergs have been considered a serious maritime hazard ever since the 1912 loss of the 'unsinkable' RMS Titanic." This implies (contrary to other information in the article) that before 1912, icebergs were not considered a serious maritime hazard.