Looks fairly fishlike to me; still amusing. I hope we'll finally get that IRL X-COM squad now: http://english.pravda.ru/science/mysteries/07-02-2007/87167-alien_monster-0 - Zelaron 14:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
How come no mention of Azov Campaigns?
Plato’s writings report that the Island of Atlantis was not an island in the open sea; it was created by the ancient Atlanteans by excavating an incredible ditch around a fertile plain, located north of a great sea, and surrounded by a boundless continent, circa 11,600 BP. A massive earthquake caused the island to sink, creating a new sea which, according to Eagle/Wind-Atlantis Research Team, is the Sea of Azov. The violent earthquakes and floods left the new sea “impassable and impenetrable, because there is a shoal of mud in the way.” The Sea of Azov was blocked by shoals of mud at that time, and would still be today without regular dredging. Eagle/Wind locates the Island of Atlantis beneath the Sea of Azov and on the adjacent fertile plains to the west in Ukraine and to the east in Krasnodar Kray, Russia. Their research is based on tectonic evidence of a massive earthquake centered at Kerch, in the late Pleistocene/early Holocene and evidence of a great flood at the end of the Younger Dryas ice age, in 11,600 BP. This date corresponds exactly with the date set by an aged Egyptian priest for the destruction of Atlantis, as recorded in The Dialogues by Plato.
References: Climate Science: Investigating Climatic and Environmental Processes, Abrupt Climate Change: http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/abrupt.html Manifestations of young tectonic activity in the southern Azov and Kerch fault zones (Crimea), A. A. Nikonov Joint Institute of Physics of the Earth, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow. GEOTECTONICS, English Translation, VOL. 28, NO. 5, APRIL 1995, Russian Edition: SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1994. http://eos.wdcb.rssi.ru/transl/geot/9405/pap02.htm LATE GLACIAL GREAT FLOOD IN THE BLACK SEA AND CASPIAN SEA, TCHEPALYGA, Andrey, Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Science, 29, Staromonetniy per, Moscow 109017 Russia. http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2003AM/finalprogram/abstract_63243.htm THE ALTAI FLOOD. Keenan Lee, 4 October 2004. http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:LV1I2rbyQJEJ:www.mines.edu/academic/geology/faculty/klee/altai.doc&hl=en VULNERABILITY TO EARTHQUAKES IN UKRAINE, I.I.Rokityansky, Institute of Geophysics, Ukraine. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/RMS/july2000/Papers/absroki.pdf Map of Kerch faults. East Oil Company, http://www.eastoil.com/graphics/11az.jpg
The article below says "reprinted by permission", but do we in fact have permission? Even if we do, is this the article we want?Vicki Rosenzweig[moved text begins below] Washington, 19 June 2001 (RFE/RL)
-- The Sea of Azov is dying, but none of the prescriptions being recommended by experts politically possible.
Russian scholars told a Moscow newspaper last week that the Sea of Azov in southern Russia is now at the point of catastrophe. The amount of water flowing into the sea has declined by 15 cubic kilometers over the last 40 years, the salinity of its waters has increased by three percent, and the amount of petroleum and heavy metal pollution has increased as well, with large amounts of radioactive materials now being recorded.
As a result, the scholars told "Vremya MN" that the sea's formerly rich biological diversity is being destroyed. Commercial fishing yields have fallen 97 percent since the 1970s, and many unique species have become extinct. If current trends continue, the Sea of Azov will become yet another dead sea, a body of water that cannot support either life within it or the lives of the people who live around it.
According to the scholars that work at the Azov Fisheries Research Institute, people and governments have long known what was happening but have been unable or unwilling to do something about it. More than 20 years ago, scholars there and in Moscow developed a mathematical model of the Sea of Azov, one that accurately predicted both what would happen to the sea and what human beings needed to do to save it.
According to the newspaper, several steps must be taken now if this body of water is to avoid a premature death. Commercial fishing should be prohibited for about 20 years, and poaching prevented. Moreover, the government must insist that any industrial waste being discharged into the sea be processed so as not to harm the environment. Shipping must also be reduced, and any oil and gas exploration and processing simply banned.
But as the paper notes, "everyone understands that the realization of such plans is unrealistic." No one is going to be willing to stop the construction of a major terminal on the Sea of Azov or close the existing Taganrog port. For even the minimal steps, such as cleaning industrial discharge, "there are no means," the experts said. And because of the economic hardships the region is suffering, there is little willingness to crack down hard on poaching.
As a result, the experts told the paper, about the only thing the Russian government can be expected to do is to control and regulate the amount of fish harvested each year and try to save a few of the species now threatened with extinction. Such steps will not save the sea, but they may prolong its life for a few additional years.
The sad fate of the Sea of Azov is especially disturbing because of the matter-of-fact way the newspaper reports it. Many people have been agitated for a long time about the pollution of Lake Baikal in Siberia and about the drying up of the Aral Sea in Central Asia. Indeed, both of these developments have helped to power environmental and even political movements.
But the Sea of Azov has not attracted equal attention or generated an analogous political response. Instead, a small group of scholars has complained to a single newspaper, and both the scholars and the newspaper seem convinced that Moscow does not have the necessary funds to act and that nothing is likely to be done.
Given Russia's various problems, they may be right. But the problems in the Sea of Azov are likely to have an impact on other countries as well. The Sea of Azov drains into the Black Sea, and consequently, its problems are likely to become problems for that larger body of water, affecting fishing and commerce for all the littoral states. And because the Black Sea connects to the Mediterranean, its problems can in turn affect an enormous area.
Fifty years ago, few thought that the drying up of the Aral Sea would happen or would matter. Now, as the body of water approaches its end, the disappearance of the Aral is affecting the health of people across Central Asia and weather around the entire northern hemisphere.
Now, as the article in the Moscow newspaper last week makes clear, few people seem to care about the fate of the Sea of Azov. But the problems the newspaper describes strongly suggest that the impact of the death of that sea will be seen far sooner than 50 years from now.
By Paul Goble. Copyright (c) 2001. RFE/RL, Inc. Reprinted with the permission of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 1201 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Washington DC 20036. www.rferl.org
[end material moved from article page]
The landlocked Mediterranean is virtually tideless. It is around 4000 km long, and has a volume of about 4 million km3. Its connection to the oceans of the world is only 14 km wide.
Connected to the Mediterranean by a channel only 1 km wide is the Black Sea. It is a quarter of the length and a twentieth of the volume of the Med. It has effectively no tides.
Connected to the Black sea by a channel 4 km wide is the Sea of Azov. It is 340 km long and has a volume of only 400 km3. Its maximum depth is only 15 metres, and most of it is less than 10 metres deep. Whence come these phenomenal 5m tides?
For comparison, the world record tides in the Bay of Fundy are only three times this magnitude, while the mid ocean maximum is less than a metre.--King Hildebrand 18:44, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
The math doesn't work with respect to inflows and outflows as the article is currently expressed.
Total: +2.5 km^3 [+/- 2 km^3]
This indicates a net inflow. The 17 km^3 net outflow comment is probably strictly with reference to the Black Sea itself and would seem to discount the other sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.16.215.129 (talk) 17:00, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Sea of Azov. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
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).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:25, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Not sure about your definition of shallow, but Lake Neusiedl is no more than 1.8 m (5 ft 11 in) deep. It's no tiny little lake, it's 36 km long and covers 315 square kilometers and it is the largest endorheic lake in Central Europe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sea_of_Azov/Lake_Neusiedl — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.128.188.61 (talk) 16:59, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Where is the name "Temarinda" attested? It's not in Pliny's Naturalis Historia, here's what Pliny wrote about Maeotians and the Sea of Azov:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137%3Abook%3D4%3Achapter%3D24
77.234.148.154 (talk) 13:52, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
It's at VI.20, not VI.7.
"Maeotim Temarundam, quo significant matrem maris."
The discrepancy comes about because of rival numbering systems in different editions of Pliny: both can be seen here: https://ryanfb.github.io/loebolus-data/L352.pdf and http://www.poesialatina.it/_ns/ProsaLat/PlinSen/NH06.html (section 20 in the Arabic numerals; section VII in the Roman). VI.20 would be more commonly used these days, because it's more specific. In English, "...the Sea of Azov [is called] the Temarunda, which means in their language 'the mother of the sea'" (tr. H. Rackham, Loeb Classical Library). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:2231:3260:F03E:7E47:2A5D:4CFE (talk) 21:49, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Brand new here, so sorry if I'm violating conventions...
In the introduction, the following erroneous text exists:
"The Sea of Azov is the shallowest sea in the world, with the depth varying between 0.9 and 1.4 feet"
This clearly contradicts other sections of the article with mentions an average depth of 7 meters.
I was curious how one would wage a naval campaign in 27 to 43 cm of water. :-)
premise: I cannot access ref.11, otherwise I had not written this.
From the article Azov (city), I read that the Kipchaks seized the area in 1067. This suggests that the prince Asuf was killed "in TAKING THIS city" rather than "in DEFENDING HIS city" -- really, what started my doubts is that rarely the cities are named after the defeated side (and a resistance against a local counter-attack does not seem probable). In any case, he was an invader and thus the city was not HIS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.29.59.56 (talk) 08:13, 22 May 2022 (UTC)