Talk:List of islands by area/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Continental landmass

Why is Europe a continental landmass? In order to qualify as a continent a landmass must meet certain criteria:

1. They must have their own river and drainage system which drains into the ocean. Europe has several of its own, so do Asia, Africa, North America and South America.

2. This is the most important one: Each continent must have its own shield. Shield is a geologic term for the underlying layer of bedrock. It consists of a slope at either end, and a large flat area in the middle, which rises above sea level. Europe is situated on one shield and Asia is situated on an entirely different shield. Europe and Asia form a supercontinent called Eurasia. Africa and Eurasia form another, bigger supercontinent called Afro-Eurasia. North America and South America form a single supercontinent called America. 203.161.97.193 (talk) 01:43, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

But this is a list of islands, not continents. Europe is not surrounded by water so it is in no way an island. Africa-Eurasia, on the other hand, is surrounded by water so it is in effect an enormous island, although that's generally not what it's called. These continental islands (for want of a better term) are included in this article for comparison with the normal islands, but their subdivisions (e.g. Europe) have no place here. Bazonka (talk) 20:33, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I can understand your point. I have deleted the entries for Europe and Asia. We should list those continental landmasses surrounded by water only, not all the existing continental landmasses. However, continental landmasses Eurasia, Africa, North America and South America should still be listed according to this resolution. 203.161.97.193 (talk) 01:43, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Eurasia is not surrounded by water, it is connected to Africa. Africa is not surrounded by water, it is connected to Eurasia. North America is not surrounded by water, it is connected to South America. South America is not surrounded by water, it is connected to North America. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 04:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Eurasia is surrounded by water, it was connected to Africa. Africa is surrounded by water, it was connected to Eurasia. North America is surrounded by water, it was connected to South America. South America is surrounded by water, it was connected to North America.

Further information: Suez Canal and Panama canal

203.176.109.10 (talk) 05:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

We should ignore the artificial and continentally insignificant canals - these are adequately covered by the note under the table. Also, double-counting by e.g. including both Eurasia and Afro-Eurasia is not at all helpful. Bazonka (talk) 05:18, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

A canal just scratches the surface of a continent, the shelf is still under it. If we were going to count all divisions by canals (and I assume rivers) then we'd have to for example list the eastern seaboard of the USA, which through a system of canals is not connected by land to the rest of the country. Anyway, back to your original post, Europe and Asia do not have different continental shields. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 05:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Can I just remind people to bear in mind WP:3RR. If this constant reverting continues, then there is the risk of a breach. Bazonka (talk) 05:41, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for interruption, but why are you people going back and forth in the discussions? Why going back to the discussion about continents again? Didn't you guys already reached a resolution on that? For this article, I reckon we should forget about the continents. What we should list on this article are landmasses. A landmass is a large continuous area of land. The eastern seaboard of the U.S. is not a landmass, whether or not it's connected by land to the rest of the country doesn't really matter, it just isn't significant enough. Afro-Eurasia and America are no longer large continuous areas of land due to those artificial but significant canals, they could be listed as a bit of extra info. I'd like to remove them if they do cause confusing though. However, landmasses Eurasia, Africa, North America and South America must be included, along with the undisputed Antarctica and Australia. It's quite strange that the English version of the article doesn't clearly explain the definition of landmass and how many landmasses are there in the world (there are six landmasses instead of four).

(in Persian) توده خاکی

(in Chinese) 大陆

These wiki articles in foreign languages have more explanations about landmasses. It would be nice if someone can help translating them to English. 223.27.99.44 (talk) 09:04, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

A landmass is "a large continuous extent of land". The eastern seaboard of the USA is a large continuous area of land, isolated by artificial but significant canals. Due to your logic, North America is not a continuous area of land (and therefore per your argument shouldn't be listed). Chipmunkdavis (talk) 09:31, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Dear IP user, I see you have violated the 3RR rule despite my warning. If I had more time I would report you. Bazonka (talk) 10:52, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't quite understand what you were saying. Did you mean Northern America instead? What I said is that North America (including Northern America, Mexico and the Central America) is a large continuous area of land significant enough to be classified as a landmass while the eastern seaboard of the U.S. isn't. 223.27.99.44 (talk) 11:07, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

No, I didn't, and I don't know how you could have come to that conclusion. What makes North America continuous, with a whole bunch of it cut off by canals, but makes the americas as a whole not continuous? Chipmunkdavis (talk) 12:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I was an Iranian exchange student in Shanghai, I can understand both of those articles. The term landmass has been defined as a large continuous area of land on a continental basis. In other words, you have to be a continent to be considered a landmass, but not vise versa. There are 7 continents on Earth, but just 6 landmasses because Continent Europe and Continent Asia are joined together by land. You can say landmasses are continents, but you can't say continents are landmasses (although several of them are). That's why the geographic community prefers to use the 6-continent mode instead of the 7-continent mode. Afro-Eurasia and America are supercontinents consist of 2 independent landmasses.

Chipmunkdavis, arguments without evidences will only make your point weaker. There's no way the eastern seaboard of the USA can be considered a landmass. Just curious, since you brought them into the discussions several times, could you provide some evidences such as maps etc. to back youself up? From your profile it seems that you are a Malaysian Chinese? I think your Chinese is probably better than mine, have a look at the articles 大陆 (landmass) and 洲 (continent). I think they have been differentiated quite clearly. Zarrin-dokht (talk) 05:03, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

This is primarily an article about islands. The reason the continental landmasses are. included is because they are entirely surrounded by water - they're enormous islands. But obviously the use of the phrase "continental landmass" in this case can be confusing due to the different meanings of the two words. Calling them islands in this article would also seem odd. But I think the real question here is whether we consider canals to cause splits in the islands or not. If not, we must treat the Americas as one massive island, and Afro-Eurasia as an even bigger one. If we do, then The US eastern seaboard must be separated and Great Britain would fragment into a multitude of islands. This latter option would be weird, messy, hard to source and practically impossible to implement properly and consistently. I think the choice is clear. Bazonka (talk) 05:32, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Please pardon me. I didn’t realise that there were overlinkings. I prefer to use the words continental landmass, the introduction section of the article as well as the subtitle also use the words continental landmass, but landmass is okay to me. I have modified the article to include landmasses Eurasia, Africa, North America and South America (I really don’t see any reason why they shouldn’t be listed). One important thing I would like to point out is that it is not the canals that are causing problems, even without those canals there are still six landmasses in the world. I reckon the best way to solve the problem is to include all six landmasses as well as those two superlandmasses (would like a better word for them though) but leave all of them unranked to avoid confusion. Since this article is mainly about the islands, I really can’t see why the landmasses have to be ranked, they were supposed to be included for comparison purpose. Zarrin-dokht (talk) 15:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

You're definition of landmass makes no sense. If you're basing it on continental plates, it's wrong. If you're basing it off separation by tiny strips of water, it's wrong. How, without the canals, are there six landmasses in the world? Chipmunkdavis (talk) 03:36, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

It's not my definition of landmass. Have you had a look at the articles 大陆 (landmass) and 洲 (continent)? They have been differentiated quite clearly. Since you have a basic understanding of Chinese and a professional level of English, it would be a great help if you can translate them to English so those people who doesn't have a clear idea what the word landmass means can stop reverting those, according to their self-centred point of view, "bad edits". Thanks. Zarrin-dokht (talk) 04:24, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

You're missing the point which is that this is an article about islands, not continents. We define islands as pieces of land entirely surrounded by water. Now some of these pieces of land are so large that they are of continental or super-continental proportions and are not generally referred to as islands, but gigantic islands is what they are. This talk of the differences in the meanings of "continent" and "landmass" is irrelevant. This should be simple - ignoring the canals, there are four "islands" larger than Greenland: Afro-Eurasia, Americas, Australia and Antarctica. Breaking these down into component continents is not relevant to this article's subject matter. Bazonka (talk) 05:21, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

This is getting ridiculous, ever since the first post I made in this discussion I was talking about landmasses, not continents. Of course I know this article is about islands, not continents. The talk of the differences in the meanings of continent and landmass is very important because what we should list here, as indicated by the original author of this article in the introduction section as well as the subtitle, are landmasses (or continental landmasses), not islands or gigantic islands (calling landmasses islands or gigantic islands is fundamentally very wrong). The term landmass has been defined as a large continuous area of land on a continental basis (this is what I said in my first post). I think even a 10-year-old boy with the help of a world map can understand how many large continuous areas of land on a continental basis are there in the world. It's six, not seven, not four, but six. It's just that simple. Zarrin-dokht (talk) 07:49, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

The "on a continental basis" is your own OR. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 07:50, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Where have you been? I was waiting for you! Please translate this sentence (Source: 大陆 (landmass)) into professional level English:

从地质上来看，一个大陆除位於海平面上的陸地部分外，还包括环绕它的大陆架。大陆架的地壳的平均密度是2.8克/立方厘米，与大洋底的地壳平均密度（2.9克/立方厘米）相差甚大，这个差别的原因是因为两种地壳的组成部分和形成过程不同。

Thanks. Zarrin-dokht (talk) 08:01, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

It's something along the lines of, "From geology perspective, one mainland is territory higher than sea level, and surrounding continental shelf. Continental shelf density is 2.8 grams per cm3, and ocean crust (I assume) density (2.9 grams per cm3) is big difference, this difference is because the two created differently." (Not professional English there, but I was looking per part.) Basically saying continental crust is different to oceanic crust. It's unsourced but sounds about right. How does this support 6 landmasses? Chipmunkdavis (talk) 08:14, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

OMG. It wasn't talking about the continents, it was meant to be the landmasses. Continents are defined in this article:洲. I have to say your English level is indeed very professional. You have cleverly but intentially mistranslate the word landmass to mainland and use some sort of chaotic English sentences to try to hide the key points. Okay, I can see your point now. Since you are supporting the 4-landmass mode, of course you will ignore the main points raised by me. You can fool other people, but not me.

Please, someone out there who has been neutral and has a good understanding of Chinese, can you help? We really need a third party to translate the article to English for us. Cheers. Zarrin-dokht (talk) 08:45, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

大陆 can be translated as continent, or as mainland, backed up by the nciku Chinese dictionary. Google translate gives a similar summary to mine, although with the better grammar you seek, and also uses the word mainland. Why pray, are you trying to use unsourced articles in other languages to support yourself if you don't even know what they are saying? Chipmunkdavis (talk) 09:05, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. The Chinese Wikipedia article really isn't a very good thing to be basing your arguments on. If the nub of your problem is the use of the word "landmasses" in this article, then change that word, not what's listed below it. Bazonka (talk) 09:56, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Geologically speaking, there are six large distinct landmasses/tectonic plates that make up the Earth's dry land. Whether Europe (or Asia) is a seperate continental landmass is debatable. Hadi Payami (talk) 04:28, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Have you actually read any of the discussion above? This article is about islands, e.g. contiguous areas of land entirely surrounded by water. We are not talking about continents. Continental landmasses are just enormous islands - and Europe and Asia must therefore very definitely be listed together, but also they are connected to Africa, so that's part of the same "island". Similarly, North and South America are connected and so are part of the same "island" and shouldn't be separated. Yes, I know that the Suez and Panama Canals exist, but these are artificial and insignificant, and if we were to take canals into consideration, then the US Eastern Seaboard would have to be listed separately, and Great Britain would fragment into a multitude of islands - it would be impossible to consistently incorporate into this article. Therefore we must ignore canals.

Regarding your note about Borneo - whilst it's not incorrect, I fail to see its relevance in a list about the area of islands. The countries that occupy those islands is useful additional information to present here, but it's not the primary focus of the article, and so adding additional trivia about it seems unnecessary here. Bazonka (talk) 07:41, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I did. I even read the Persian link listed above (توده خاکی). What I want to point out here is that continental landmasses are not islands, they got nothing to do with the enormity of the land. The definition of island has been clearly defined in geology. Yes, Eurasia and Africa are joined together, so do North and South America, but at the same time they all belong to distinct tectonic plates. The fact they are joined together by land doesn't displace the fact that they are separate continental landmasses. Whether Europe or Asia forms a separate continental landmass is debatable, but Eurasia as a whole, as well as the rest are definitely separate continental landmasses. I noticed that in this article, it's the continental landmasses, not supercontinents (two or more continental landmasses joined together) are being used as a comparison to islands. Therefore, we should not include the likes of Afro-Eurasia and Americas in it.

Here are some additional information about this topic which may interest you, all of them from reliable sources:

Tectonic plates

Continents

Europe

As for Borneo, I believe that their unique status should be noted. It's just like you said, it is a piece of useful additional information about an island. Since this article is about islands and that particular island is considered to be important, why not include it? Hadi Payami (talk) 06:52, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

You are either missing the point, or deliberately avoiding it. This is an article about areas of land that are entirely surrounded by water. Normally these are called islands, but some of them are so big (e.g. Africa-Eurasia) that the term "island" is not generally used - in this article we use the alternative name "continental landmasses". I agree that this terminology could be a bit confusing, because it implies that we are talking about continents - but we're not - the article is about land surrounded by water. Whether these landmasses made of one, two or three tectonic plates/continents is not relevant to the scope of this article.

Consider this hypothetical situation. If the northern part of Madagascar (or any of the other "normal" islands) was part of one continental shield, and its south was part of another continental shield, then would we list Madagascar twice in this article? No, of course we wouldn't, because it's still one island. And this is exactly the same situation that we have with the Americas and Africa-Eurasia. They are just enormous islands, and their continental make-up is totally, utterly and completely irrelevant to the scope of an article about the sizes of islands.

Also, your trivia about the countries on Borneo is also irrelevant to an article about sizes - it's more appropriate for List of divided islands. Bazonka (talk) 10:43, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Area of Great Britain

Great Britain appears as 7th in the list with an area of 229848 sq km. Elsewhere we read it is 9th largest with an area of 209331 sq km., slightly smaller than Victoria Island. They can't both be right. 2.97.151.5 (talk) 09:53, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

The error was made in this edit back in May - probably based on adding together the areas of England, Scotland and Wales without realising that those countries also include many subsidiary islands (Shetland, Anglesey, Isle of Wight, etc.) I've reverted it to comply with the figure in the UN list. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:09, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Miscou Island New Brunswick Canada

I am from Lameque Island which is just before Miscou Island. Lameque does not appear on your list as it is only 150 km2. Miscou is smaller than Lameque island. It is only 64 km2. Therefore, it should be remove from this list. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.246.228.2 (talk) 20:00, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes. It looks like someone got the decimal point in the wrong place as it was listed as 640 km². I've removed it, although you could have done it yourself! Bazonka (talk) 22:30, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Total land area of Earth

List of countries and outlying territories by total area has the 148,940,000 km² as total land area of Earth. But when I sum up the continent areas here and Greenland, it is 490,800 km² more. And there are still huge amount of islands not counted. So either the whole area in the other article is wrong or the continental areas here are wrong. 82.141.72.135 (talk) 13:11, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Not all of the land area of the earth lies in a country. Mainly, parts of Antarctica are unclaimed.Ordinary Person (talk) 12:24, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

That does not explain anything. It was said that total land area is 148.94 million km² and according this article continents (where Antarctica is included) + Greenland are more than total land area of Earth. And, if the other islands areas are counted, it will be still more. So, either the world area is missing something or continent areas include something extra (actually these probably contain at least inland islands, which some of these are). 81.198.209.26 (talk) 09:45, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Recent changes: Greenland as smallest continent

User @Samstayton: has made some bold changes to this list. Here is the diff showing the net changes of the several edits.

I think these edits should be discussed, indeed reverted and then discussed. Specifically my concern is with listing Greenland with the continents and re-ranking the rest of the list. While I have no strong opinion whether we call Greenland a continent or an island, I suspect the vast majority of sources would consider Greenland an island, and there are many articles that link to this page with the assumption that Greenland is ranked at 1 with the other islands ranked accordingly. Also, I don't really like the grouping by percentage of total land mass.

I am reverting Samstayton's changes now per WP:BRD --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 23:55, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:List of islands by area/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Australia is actually a country, and is on the oceanic continent, so surely it is the largest island in the world In the list of islands, Haida Gwaii (at 10,180 sq km) is missing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.5.177.79 (talk) 20:57, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Substituted at 20:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Cape Cod

Cape Cod is an island? I've never heard of that. There's a canal that traverses across it but that doesn't make it an island. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.195.153.105 (talk) 02:21, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Peloponnese

Canals are a basic question when it comes to islands. Should the Peloponnese be added to the list? How about New England or Scandinavia? The Corinth Canal, Champlain Canal, Erie Canal , and White Sea–Baltic Canal are all examples of canals that relate to the question.67.5.182.117 (talk) 22:29, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

New Second largest Island

I was looking up Bifurcating rivers and came across http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casiquiare_canal (which is a natural river, not really a canal, dodging the above canal debate). This links the river systems of the Amazon and the Orinoco, making much of northeastern South America a giant island. By my eyeballing, it looks to be around 400,000 mi², which would make it the second largest island in the world. I can't find a name for it, or definite stats on it however. Perhaps some more studious individual could figure out the details and add it to the list. 24.18.242.166 (talk) 06:20, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

That's not exactly the same thing. While the section of land in question is surrounded by water, they are different bodies of water, at different elevations, etc. I think most all river bifurcations result in the formation of some such islands? Perhaps called "bifurcation islands"? and this would be the world's largest? I can't remember where I first read all about this, it was long time ago, so I dont thing the idea of the island is "new". I haven't had any luck searching for info on the island using the terms: "Casiquiare", "island", "bifucation", "Amazon", "Orinoco", or any combination of those. We need a source before anything can be added. --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 11:54, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Great Britain

Great Britain is listed here as being 209,331 km² with rank #9.
However, its article has the area as 229,848 km², so it would be ahead of Victoria Island. Though, List of islands of the British Isles has yet another figure, 216,777 km². My 70s encyclopedia has the area as 218,042 km², and the areas usually grow by time. 85.217.21.147 (talk) 00:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Lost me at the end there. Can you explain what you mean "...and the areas usually grow by time"? --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 01:34, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

It means that the land is claimed naturally from the sea by time. At least in Scandinavia, that happens. 85.217.21.147 (talk) 01:38, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

There are now two entries for Britain. Please delete either one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.80.235.114 (talk) 03:52, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Cleaning up

I noticed that several of the islands sizes did not match with the sources and I tried to correct that. I also saw that some of the conversions to square miles were incorrect so I used the {{convert}} template. I removed the sort function from the area columns. If they are sortable then they need to use the {{Number table sorting}} template. Given that the area can only be sorted in two ways, largest to smallest and smallest to largest, the same effect can be had by using the rank column. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 13:04, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

There are two 322 in the list; and, Eleuthera (of 200 sq mi) of the Bahamas could be included in the list.--✉ Hello World! 10:26, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Eleuthera was unsourced at that area. According to the source used here, http://islands.unep.ch/Tiarea.htm, it is 457.4 km² (176.6 sq mi). I've updated the Eleuthera article with the source. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 22:13, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

An obvious problem with the area of Americas

When talking about land entirely surrounded by water, the area of the landmass Americas should never include that of Greenland, Cuba, etc. Thus I re-calculated the land area of the "island" of Americas using stats from Americas#Countries_and_territories and List of Canadian islands by area, which gave me an answer of less than 38,390,000 sqr km. --霎起林野间 (talk) 13:04, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

The text here suggests that these islands were never part of the original number. There's no need to recalculate by subtracting what wasn't included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wristshot (talk • contribs) 02:17, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

One thing to add, If 42,300,000 sqr km for the Americas considers the continental shelf as a whole, then Australia should NOT be only 7,600,000 sqr km because New Guinea Island is part of its continental shelf. We need to apply the same criteria for each of them. --霎起林野间 (talk) 01:32, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Americas article has 42,549,000 km² as the area and that should include islands also. The five biggest islands are combined 3,160,638, and those taken off the figure results quite close to the above 38,390,000. The rest of the islands will take it under 38,000,000 for sure (I needed only 11 next islands to that). 85.76.65.121 (talk) 02:09, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Islands are larger than the group of islands they belong to

Jamaica, Saint Lucia, Martinique and Dominica list areas that conflict with other Wikipedia articles. For example, the island of Jamaica is listed as 11,190 but in the list of sovereign states and dependencies by area, the country of Jamaica is only listed as 10,831. The article on Jamaica itself lists and area of 10,991. All four island nations include their entire island plus small islets but all four island nations have areas smaller than their one main island.Bejjinks (talk) 21:01, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Cape Cod, not Cod Island

I see that Cape Cod is on this list, no doubt placed there by some intrepid soul proud of having learned that it is "separated" by a canal from the mainland (for about a hundred years now). Well, poppycock. If Cod is an island because a man-made structure has separated it from the mainland, then Manhattan is not an island anymore because man-made structures have connected it to the mainland. I note that the Hellenophiles on Wikipedia have not made the same mistake with the Peloponnesus. Unschool 06:39, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on List of islands by area. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dfat.gov.au/aib/island_continent.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140329071215/http://sowf.moi.gov.tw/stat/month/m1-01.xls to http://sowf.moi.gov.tw/stat/month/m1-01.xls
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100802230249/http://www.adn.com/2010/07/31/1389864/turns-out-kodiak-is-largest-us.html to http://www.adn.com/2010/07/31/1389864/turns-out-kodiak-is-largest-us.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100412133934/http://personal.inet.fi/koti/kauko.huotari/saaret.htm to http://personal.inet.fi/koti/kauko.huotari/saaret.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110615162130/http://www.ntnu.no/ub/formidl/utgivelser/til_opplysning/to_nr15.php to http://www.ntnu.no/ub/formidl/utgivelser/til_opplysning/to_nr15.php

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 22:51, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Missing information

The list of islands by area is missing Phú Quốc Islan. Please consider to add it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Võ Quang Hòa (talk • contribs) 17:21, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Source of list and length

I think this article should be based on a sourced list of the largest islands, rather than just listing a huge number of islands, many of whose areas are unsourced. Is this source regarded as notable for such a list. As an alternative, the list should be cut right down, and as a starting point, we could remove the 500-999km2 section. Any comments? Eldumpo (talk) 09:01, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

OPPOSE It's a common sense that Wikipedia is a good starting point for general knowledge. Wiki provides large amount of basic information to our users so they can start sourcing more info (and hopefully they can come back and edit our articles to make them better). It's often very hard to find those info without Wikipedia doing the basic work for them. 120.16.149.157 (talk) 00:09, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes Wikipedia can be a good starting point, but should only be reflecting the sources out there. In the absence of reliable sources showing such a long list, it should be cut down. Have you edited on Wikipedia before? Eldumpo (talk) 07:35, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Eldumpo it's far too long as is. Sometimes the amount of information is too much and this is one of those cases. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 00:20, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

I've re-removed the smallest islands from the list, but what do you think about my above suggestion that this article should really be based on a single sourced list for clarity? Eldumpo (talk) 07:37, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

A single source would be fine. I assume this, which is already used, has the largest number of islands listed. However, other sources will be required as some don't appear to be on that list. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 08:12, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes I saw that in use for some sources. Not sure how notable/reliable it is. Unfortunate as well it puts the lowest sized first. Eldumpo (talk) 20:33, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Single source is outrageous. Wikipedia is strongly discouraging articles with a single source of information. 103.228.188.122 (talk) 08:19, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

I wouldn't class it as 'outrageous'! If we assume that the principle of listing at least some of the worlds largest islands is a notable topic then surely picking a single source is the only way of clearly ranking a list. Eldumpo (talk) 20:33, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Sorry I have to revert your edit. I do not agree that deleting those entries is the only way to go. Maybe we can make a collapsible table instead? Some of the smaller islands on the list do have relevant references attached to them. It's not like the list is totally unsourced, and sourcing each entry on the list would be outlandish and almost impossible. I believe the list was compiled by a lot of editors before us and after checking its edit history we know that the list had been there for a long time and no one seems to have a problem with it. I reckon the dilemma with Wikipedia is that anyone can edit it, and due to this nature a lot of work done by other users can be erased by one or two editors if the work is deemed inappropriate by them. The consequence though is that a large quantity of information is lost and it will be hard for future Wiki users to retrieve those information. I am more of an inclusionist and I believe we need an overwhelming consensus before we can make a massive deletion in Wikipedia. 103.228.188.122 (talk) 08:13, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Well, in basic terms on Wikipedia everything needs to be sourced, which is another reason why a single source for the list is better. A collapsible table might be useful in reducing the viewable size of the page, although I'm not seeing substantial evidence that going that low with the islands is notable. Yes work has gone into the list but that's not a reason for saying that nothing can ever be deleted. Everyone knows their edits have the potential to be deleted/amended by someone else. Eldumpo (talk) 20:39, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

#309, Hecla Island, Canada

Hecla Island is nowhere near 1,084 square kilometres, it's probably only 10% of that size. I was unable to find a source citing its exact size, but the article linked to it seems to refer to the provincial park, which covers significantly more area than just the island.

I have no experience editing, so I haven't changed the article, but I noticed this and thought I'd point it out.

ReptileGaming (talk) 00:37, 22 December 2017 (UTC)ReptileGaming

It looks wrong and I removed it. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 21:22, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Choice of map

Surely there is a better choice of map than the one currently in use. This is especially important for this particular article's purpose of illustrating a ranking of islands by size. This makes it look like Antarctica is five times larger than Australia, and that Greenland is of near equal size to Australia when the image directly above it demonstrates otherwise. Jay eyem (talk) 12:06, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Australia

The text says that Australia is not an island, but the reference that it gives to justify that claim says it is. Either Australia needs to be put on the list, or the reference needs to be changed to one that justifies it being omitted from the list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.90.243.186 (talk) 21:50, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Agreed, Australia is most deninitely an Island. It is not a Continent as it forms part of the larger Autralasia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.104.223.52 (talk) 07:48, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately, although it is pretty clear to me that Australia meets the definition of an Island, given for example in Britania - "Island, any area of land smaller than a continent and entirely surrounded by water.", that same source says it isn't. So, although mainland Australia meets definition of island, by convention it seems we refer to it as a continent only. Although, once again, the continent includes multiple land masses (see Australia (continent) article which presumably shows the consensus on that, unlike the shrunk continent shown on this page), not just the separate "mainland" - and so, if the "mainland" isn't an island, what is it?

Bottom line, calling it an island, while correct (IMNSHO), is probably both a non-consensus position and original research. Annoying. Thejackos (talk) 04:30, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Removed the erroneous Australia vs Greenland comparison graphic

I have removed the erroneous Australia vs Greenland comparison graphic (Australia-Greenland_size_comparison.svg), which was featured prominently near the top of the page. The graphic was erroneous for depicting Australia as the country (minus some overseas territories) and not Australia as either the mainland or the continent. It showed Australia as including Tasmania, the islands in the Bass Strait, Kangaroo Island, Melville Island, Fraser Island, etc, while not including the island of New Guinea, which is also part of continental Australia. It should have shown just the mainland or the entire continent, not (basically) the political entity of Australia. Oska (talk) 02:26, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Bear Island (#154)

I don't think Bear Island exists at the supposedly massive size that the article gives it. The Bear Island article linked to is only a small 4-square-km island three orders of magnitude short of the area given in the article, and there's nothing of even comparable area in the vicinity. I would recommend a removal of the listing unless someone can find a reliable source that there is a Bear Island, and that it is 3500 km^2. exoplanetaryscience (talk) 03:17, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

• Agreed. Removed it. Didgogns (talk) 13:03, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Antarctica

The area listed for Antarctica are included both floating ice shelves, which the source say are 11 % of the continent's area, and surrounding islands. I suggest to list only the continental landmass, which are around 12,500,000 km². Karriuss (talk) 00:39, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

I know mainland Antarctica is approx. 12,500,000 km², but none of the reliable sources have a given a proper figure for the area of mainland Antarctica. I can understand why they did it because under the Antarctic ice sheet, mainland Antarctica isn't a single landmass. If you find a WP:RS which provides a figure for mainland Antarctica, you are welcome to make the change. Vic Park (talk) 06:16, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Peloponnese vs Södertörn

Both, in fact, are peninsulas, separated from the mainland by a man-made canal. Why then Peloponnese is not on the list, but Södertörn is Tregnum (talk) 18:53, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Before the Södertälje canal was build, there was already a small waterway, so was highly likely been an island before that. https://web.archive.org/web/20141230042559/http://www.scb.se/sv_/Om-SCB/Nyheter-och-pressmeddelanden/Behallare-for-Nyheter-och-Pressmeddelanden/Om-oar/ Karriuss (talk) 14:29, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Great Karimun

This island clearly has the wrong area on this list. Visually, it is much smaller than the neighboring islands that are on this list, but are located much lower in it. For example Bintan. It is 294 on the list (Karimun is 254), but it has a much larger size on the Google Maps. In this case, it is located quite close, which allows you to reject distortion. Tregnum (talk) 11:05, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I removed it. Just by comparing on Google Maps you can see it is less then half the size of Singapore, and Singapore is nowhere close to big enough to make the list. TurkeyCookTime (talk) 03:09, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Bear Island

Is anyone sure that Bear Island (Antarctica) actually exists? The coordinates on the Bear Island article correspond to empty ocean, and the article also says it is 1.9km west of Stonington Island - which also doesn't seem to exist. TurkeyCookTime (talk) 16:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I found Stonington Island, which is a tiny island off the coast of Antarctica, but west of it is just empty ocean. I'm removing Bear Island from the list. TurkeyCookTime (talk) 16:16, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

More Islands?

There are a few Antarctic islands that aren't on the list but seem like they should be. I couldn't find the areas documented so I used Google My Maps to measure them myself (so they might not be very accurate).

These islands are:

Rothschild Island - 3,338 km^2

Smyley Island - 3,287 km^2

Fletcher Island - 1,580 km^2

Can anyone find documented areas of these islands? If not, should they still be added? TurkeyCookTime (talk) 16:57, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Go ahead and add them, just remember to insert a note stating that these are rough measurements. 120.16.31.155 (talk) 23:57, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Hawaii Island

This island is not included! It is larger than Puerto Rico at >4000 sq.mi. 66.91.192.2 (talk) 20:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Malta

Need to add Malta — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.183.73.226 (talk) 20:28, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Area of Mainland Antarctica

According to Collins World Atlas, the total land area of Mainland Antarctica (excluding ice shelves) is 12,093,000 sq km, which is significantly smaller than the figure described in the article. 203.174.173.6 (talk) 06:45, 23 February 2023 (UTC)