Talk:Hypoxia (environmental)

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Algae Low‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Algae, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the photosynthetic organisms commonly called algae and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AlgaeWikipedia:WikiProject AlgaeTemplate:WikiProject AlgaeAlgae articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Biology Hypoxia (environmental) is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia. Leave messages on the WikiProject talk page.BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject BiologyTemplate:WikiProject BiologyBiology articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Environment Low‑importance Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Limnology and Oceanography Mid‑importance Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Weather This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

On 10 February 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to Hypoxic waters. The result of the discussion was not moved.

The creation of this page started after two suggestions that

• Removed the mergeto|Hypoxia (medical) as this has been a while now without any discussion. Ex nihil 08:14, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The first line is wrong. Partial pressures are measured in kilopascals, not units of concentration (%). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.112.20.204 (talk) 17:46, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The hypoxia disambiguation page currently lists the following under environmental:

In the environment:

• Environmental hypoxia at high altitudes the reduced partial pressure
  of oxygen available to organisms at high altitude leads to hypoxia.
• Environmental hypoxia in sea water or oxygen depletion, a reduced concentration of dissolved oxygen in a water body leading to stress and death in aquatic organisms.
• Hypoxic zones, or dead zones, are hypoxic areas in the world's oceans.
• Anoxic sea water
  is a condition where there is an abnormally low level of oxygen in the sea.
• The oxygen minimum zone is the depth in the sea at which the disolved oxygen level is lowest, or most hypoxic.

This list might be better if it could be reduced to:

• Hypoxia at high altitude
• Hypoxia (environmental)

...by merging

• The
  Anoxic sea water article seems to be about naturally occurring ones. Bejnar 05:21, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• I would oppose merging as these are all different if related subjects; the distinctions between these subjects may very well be lost. The oxygen minimum zone has in fact little to do with hypoxia as it's a natural recurring area in any ocean deep enough and not nearly as extremely oxygen deprived as the hypoxia article talks about, while for the other pages I share the objections of Bejnar above. What I would suggest to do instead, is to remake the hypoxia page, as it is the most general of the pages discussed here, into an overview page for these related but distinct concepts. --Martin Wisse 05:32, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• I think that a merger would not be easy, and I don't know that it would be beneficial. Whether the pages are merged or not, we'll have to be careful to make clear the distinctions between dead-zones, anoxic basins, minimal oxygen zones, &c. If everything was combined on one page, this would probably mean devoting a section to each concept, which might end up as little more than a cut-and-paste job, with each page imported to the mother article, given its own level-two header (or perhaps level-three, under a level-two header "Types of hypoxia", or something similar) and with few changes made to the text. On the plus side, the intrested reader would find all of the related information in one place, but on the other hand, the redirects could get confusing, and if any of the topics grows, it may need to be split out into its own article again. Leaving the pages separate emphasizes their differences, and prevents us from having to address the redirects, etc, that typically require updating following a merger. So, I guess I'm against the merger, but not very strongly. I'm also not clear on why high altitude hypoxia should be separated out from the aquatic forms in a page labeled environmental hypoxia. --Badger151 00:25, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Please do not! My class in school is studying these concepts and they are in completely different units. Wikipedia must keep these separate so I can continue my course, thanks! --75.68.60.17 03:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• I was looking up Oxygen minimum zone because within oceanology it is a concept in itself. I do not think it should be mixed up with other kinds of hypoxiaLarsrd 22:53, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• The "dead zone" in the Gulf of Mexico of caused by excess nitrogen loading from the Mississippi River. Hypoxia is the scientific term for the "dead zone" and since the Gulf "dead zone" is one of the most famous hypoxia examples, it should definitely be merged with the hypoxia article.

• The current discussion of hypoxia treats it as a form of pollution- which is fine- but this is not accurate for the oxygen minimum zones. There is evidence that these zones can change as a result of changes in physical ocean circulation as well as biology.Agnana 01:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't merge 'Dead Zone' with this article. The phrase 'dead zone' is becoming widely adopted in the media and among the general population as a way to refer to areas of the oceans that have this condition. I found the article by searching for 'dead zone' and would never have known to search on Hypoxia -- most people wouldn't. --Kbedell 13:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect from dead zone to this article would bring users to the combined article. That is normal practice when articles are merged. The goal is to avoid duplicate article text, while providing links or disambiguations from all reasonable synonyms. The reason not to combine the articles would be if the topics are really distinct. Trevor Hanson 21:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Don't merge—cross link!... there is little sense to combining technically specific terms into ballbuster articles one might not want to peruse, whereas a small screenful or so on the specific term searched is frequently just what the doctor wanted.
  • Opine, that with the lack of support found in nine months or so, this merger discussion and tagging be closed out. // FrankB 20:51, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • • I originated the 'merge to' and I acknlowledge the lack of consensus to go in this direction so I have removed tags from the articles. Agree on the need to cross link and coordinate. I won't atttempt it from here, I am in Dili, Timor Leste and the bandwidth is just too unreliable to start doing much editing, maybe one day back in Oz. Over to you guys. Ex nihil 06:34, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]