Talk:Pannonian Basin

Couldn't there be a clearer map?

This one doesn't even contain the name Pannonia. Couldn't You use something like this? https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d1/Pannoniansea_currentborders.png 94.254.181.253 (talk) 10:21, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Explanation for my edits

Explanation for my edits:

• I have corrected the sentence [1] which started with he basin covers all of the nation of Hungary - all nation of? It covers all nation of Slovakia as well, I have corrected that to covers all Hungary which is more correct and doesn`t have any dubious meaning. I have also added all the countries that can be seen on the map and mentioned that it covers all of Slovakia too (according to the map).
• Link fix that directed the cultural area to the culture of Hungary. As it can be seen from the map, there is much more than only one nation culture here.
• I have added the Romanian name.
• I have deleted the link toward Kingdom of Hungary in see also section because it has no relevance here, again, there is much more than only one nation history (in this case).
• I have added {Citation broken} because link number 6 [2] is strange. Please check it. Adrian (talk) 12:30, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
• In this edit [3] I have deleted a sentence that was a part of POV pushing. There is no culture that is created or "unified" in the Pannonian Basin and all of this nation cultures are distinct one from another. Adrian (talk) 12:39, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Removed {Citation broken} because none are broken. Yes, that footnote is odd because it is not in a European language. I removed it.GroveGuy (talk) 06:12, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

OK, I thought it it was temporary broken or moved and that the person who added it could add the page he intended to be present. Adrian (talk) 08:02, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Pannonian basin - what is its real extent ?

Why is the map of Pannonian/Carpathian basin only showing the "flat" part of the basin?

According to Wikipedia, citing: Drainage basin

"Other terms that are used to describe a drainage basin are catchment, catchment area, catchment basin, drainage area, river basin, water basin and watershed."

This means that the catchment part (mountains) are also part of the basin. Abdulka (talk) 09:01, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Pannonian Basin is a sedimentary basin, not a drainage basin. Adrian (talk) 09:44, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

The map is showing the "flat" part because that is the Pannonian Basin. What are you looking for is the other article the Carpathian Basin, which well, includes the Carpathians being the main difference from the Pannonian Basin. Hobartimus (talk) 04:27, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

This is all in mutual conflict, because there's also a third article for Pannonian Plain. IMHO it is silly to keep all three terms apart because there isn't enough content for three articles here. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 07:23, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree that this article could easily be merged into Pannonian Plain, which also has a lot more content it seems to me. It would also make it very clear how the two terms are different, the Pannonian Plain and the Carpathian Basin. One is a "Plain" and one is named after the "Carpathian mountains" thus including a lot of mountains as well, making clear it is both larger and a different area than the plain. Hobartimus (talk) 07:57, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

The trouble began with this string of anonymous unexplained edits - as usual. I'm reverting them. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:06, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I've merged all three articles. The history of the Plain article is fraught with conflict regarding the plain's extent and characteristics, and the final product is insufficiently different from the Basin to be actually properly distinct. The categories and the intl links matched almost perfectly, so this really looks like a classic superficial distinction that can be explained inline, rather than in duplicated articles. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:23, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, this map is certainly not map of Pannonian Basin, put physical map of proposed Greater Hungary. Due to that, it should not be used here. Here is map that show actual borders of the basin: http://geophysics.geoscienceworld.org/content/vol66/issue6/images/large/66_6_1669_fig1.jpeg PANONIAN 10:20, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

PANONIAN is right in that the map of the Carpathian Basin [4] is not the same as the Pannonian basin. Of course it's a lie that it is a "proposed map of Greater Hungary" It is a topographical map uploaded by a wikipedia editor with the comment "Topographic map of Carpathian Basin - created on the basis of Image:Europe topography map.png". There certainly may be inaccuracies in it but it never claimed to have been a Pannonian basin map, it is a map of the Carpathian Basin. Hobartimus (talk) 10:35, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

It looks like a map of Greater Hungary to me to :). It is very strange for this basin to follow the exact borders of this historical political entity. According to other maps of the Basin, it should go more south than the exact borders of Vojvodina. Also it includes the exact territory of Transylvania -which the basin doesn`t :). Anyway, since there is no clear evidence about this, and this is not the subject the important thing is that this doesn`t represent the Pannonian Basin map and as such it should be removed. Also this map doesn`t follow the referenced map about this subject. Adrian (talk) 10:47, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I am not saying that "map of the Carpathian Basin is not the same as the Pannonian basin". What I am saying is that this map neither show "Carpathian Basin" neither "Pannonian Basin", no matter of the question are these two same thing or not. This map is original research of its uploader and there is no source that would support claim from that map that mountains of Slovakia are part of any basin (and that is just one of many inaccuracies). So, Hobartimus,do you have any source that say that mountains of Slovakia are part of the Carpathian Basin? Besides that, we already have this map of the basin which does not have accuracy problems, so why should we use two maps that showing same thing especially in the case when one of them is obviously inaccurate. PANONIAN 14:34, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

The Pannonian Basin isn't a "basin" in the strict hydrological sense. The entire Pannonian Basin is within the Danube basin, but obviously not the entire Danube basin is part of the Pannonian basin. So it is futile to draw maps of watersheds. I agree that this map gives a good impression of the extent of the basin. Perhaps it might be better to use "plain" throughout to avoid such misunderstandings. But of course, a "plain" has no strict definition either, even less so than a "basin". And google book makes clear that "Pannonian Basin" is by far the more common term than "Pannonian Plain". It is a geological or geomorphological term and is not suited for ethnic or patriotic bickering.

The Pannonian Basin is what was on the bottom of the Pannonian Sea. The Pannonian Sea lasted for 9 million years. Obviously anyone discussing a concept stretching over such time periods isn't going to bother about narrow-minded questions on which village exactly is Pannonian, which is peri-Pannonian and which is non-Pannonian. --dab (𒁳) 10:53, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Please STOP to make politics on Wikipedia and please STOP to call the Carpathian Basin as Great Hungary, even if the Great Hungary like other countries was in the Carpathian Basin. So, you have to choice to call the whole article as Pannonian Basin, and remove that "or" Carpathian Basin, because the two names don't match. The Carpathian Basin includes more then the Pannonian Basin. Heinrich Reinhard (talk)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Pannonian Basin. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160830065104/http://www.sgd.org.rs/publikacije/glasnik/2009_4/10_Carevic.I._e.pdf to http://www.sgd.org.rs/publikacije/glasnik/2009_4/10_Carevic.I._e.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110612215835/http://www.ieed.nl/cgi-bin/response.cgi?flags=eygtnrl&single=1&basename=%2Fdata%2Fie%2Fpokorny&text_recno=1481&root=leiden to http://www.ieed.nl/cgi-bin/response.cgi?flags=eygtnrl&single=1&basename=%2Fdata%2Fie%2Fpokorny&text_recno=1481&root=leiden
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070211073956/http://www.anthro.fsu.edu/research/koros/overview/arch_background/arch_background.html to http://www.anthro.fsu.edu/research/koros/overview/arch_background/arch_background.html

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) 16:21, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Region section bias

Upon coming to this page and arriving at the Region section, I couldn't help but note that *every* country in the list was linked to its WIKI page -- except for Hungary. Each of those links were removed (if they ever existed) by someone clearly harboring some sort of bias against the country. This is my first Talk comment ever, but I wanted to make a note of what I found and corrected. People who spend their time doing these types of petty link removals clearly need their editing privileges revoked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilona.Meagher (talk • contribs) 19:05, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Hungary is clearly linked in the lede. 50.111.18.139 (talk) 21:40, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Two separate "Geography" sections

Should these sections be combined into one? They both seem to contain appropriate information for a Geography section, though the first, shorter section is missing some citations. Helenofbrooklyn (talk) 04:14, 7 June 2023 (UTC)