Talk:List of countries by lowest point

I always though that Lake Erye at 15 meters below sea level was the lowest point in Australia.

Yewenyi 02:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect title

The title seems to be incorrect. The listing is only of countries whose lowest points are above sea level.

The title should not be changed--instead, the list should continue to include all countries who have points below sea level, all the way to the Dead Sea bordering countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.114.209.94 (talk) 01:55, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about you, but I cannot imagine how a list could be useful if it listed about one hundred countries in the very same place, and, even worse, have them right in the middle. No, no, all that needs to be done is to list these countries in the footnote, which, in any case, does refer to one place in the list between the countries above sea level and those below. It's not like they are not represented; they just need to be written. Waltham, The Duke of 07:37, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a really poor list and needs a serious re-write.--Greatestrowerever (talk) 20:09, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know that the Quran mentioned the lowest point on land 1400 years ago? It mentions this when it talks about the defeat of the roamans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.93.17.228 (talk) 04:37, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Discussion

A discussion has been started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries/Lists of countries which could affect the inclusion criteria and title of this and other lists of countries. Editors are invited to participate. Pfainuk talk 11:40, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UK Lowest Point

The List of places on land with elevations below sea level article lists the UK's lowest point as Canvey Island at -6m not the Fens at -4m.....:)

WHERE IS KYRGYZSTAN ??? LOWEST POINT ! Kara-Daryya (Karadar'ya) 132 m

table sorting

When sorting the table according to elevation, it sorts alphebetically and not numerically , -1,-10,-2 instead of ,-1,-2,-10 how can this be fixed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amitair (talk • contribs) 06:18, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Feet/meter conversion way over the top

If all the heights/depths in meters are given in a whole number of meters, which they almost certainly are not, then it doesn't make sense to give the height in feet to three decimal places. After all, 1/1000 of a foot comes to 3/250 of an inch, which is just a shade more than 1/83 of an inch. The information provided is certainly not that accurate. 140.147.236.195 (talk) 19:22, 2 February 2012 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza[reply]

Sorting and conversions

OK, I did some work on this table. First of all, I set it to make the conversions from meters to feet automatically. And I set it so the conversions ran to the same number of decimal places as the original; converting to five or six decimal from an original figure that's an approximation to begin with makes no sense.

I also fiddled with the reordering feature, and it's not perfect, but improved. Now, the positives and the negatives--taken separately--order in numerical order. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to figure out what to do with the negative figures so that they order in numerical order IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. But it's much improved from what it was doing before. 173.79.191.234 (talk) 02:54, 9 February 2012 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza[reply]

Greece, is somebody sure?

Someone recently added Greece to this list; I fixed the coding so now the altitude shows in its proper place on the table (it needed two more pipes, and one more right brace at the end).

But I wonder if it really belongs here; can someone back up the information presented? Countries whose low point is sea level (typically the sea coast) are excluded from the table). The information added here about Greece says that the low point is the Mediterranean, and puts that at slightly below sea level.

I suppose it's possible, depending on prevailing currents and such, that at least part of the Mediterranean could have its surface slightly below sea level, but I don't see anything on that in the article here on the sea. Besides, if that's true, then it seems likely that a number of countries at least at the eastern end of the Mediterranean would also have coastline below sea level.

Can anybody shed any light? Uporządnicki (talk) 13:02, 4 April 2012 (UTC) P.S. I'm the person who fixed a lot of the coding before, as an IP User. Now, I'm a registered Wikipedian.[reply]

Further on that--I notice that in the article List of elevation extremes by country, Greece is among the many countries listed with low point at sea level, i.e. the sea coast. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:06, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Syria--would like to help

I'd like to help out on the Syria matter--presenting something that might not displease anybody too much. What I'd LIKE to do is, present the elevation at the shore of the Sea of Galilee, and then in a note, present the lowest elevation outside of the Golan Heights. But there's a problem. I haven't got a source.

One might suppose that if you remove the Golan Heights from consideration, the lowest elevation would be the shore of the Mediterranean, thus, sea level. But it's not so. There's a river that runs into the Jordan, and it seems to cut a valley or gorge. It runs through the Golan area. But while it's in undisputed Syria, it has already cut its way below sea level. So the lowest point of the gorge outside of Golan would be the point where it enters.

Unfortunately, I found this by looking at Google Maps; I looked on the terrain view, followed the river, and noted the contour lines (which, for some reason, ALWAYS skip the line for zero elevation. A few problems with that: It sounds to me dangerously close to Original Research; I'm having to interpolate--guess the contour--between two contour lines; Finding this doesn't guarantee that there isn't something lower somewhere else. Does anybody have a source for this? Uporządnicki (talk) 13:03, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Austria - Lowest point

The lowest point is near the village of Apetlon (114 m), which is nearby the eastern shore of Lake Neusiedl (115 m).

Apetlon

Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan values

Sarygamysh Koli and Sariqarnish Kuli is the same thing on the border between them. However, the numbers in the second reference looks very strange, at least here they are pretty much different. If follow those numbers, Uzbekistan has +5 now and is in the positive half of the list. Hatifnatter (talk) 20:59, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Niger

Look at the town fr:Gaya (ville) which is in Niger but has the elevation 175 m ... Hatifnatter (talk) 20:14, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kyrgyzstan

Well, here is the most strange. Kara Darya's lowest point is above 400 m and it is in Uzbekistan! So, 132 meters look just a huge mistake. I think, the reasonable number is aroud 435 m next to Kayrakkum reservoir, though it is not exact. Hatifnatter (talk) 21:47, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, mistake. Sergoman (talk) 03:19, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Syria revision war led to nonsense, then loss of Syria

There's a revision war going on, regarding the lowest point in Syria. The question is, does the point referred to belong to Syria or to Israel. From my understanding (and I don't claim expertise), the world is divided into two camps on the question: 1) Israel and Zionists (and it's important to note that there are Jews who are opposed to Zionism) hold that it belongs to Israel; 2) The rest of the world holds that it belongs to Syria.

Unfortunately, the last move made from the point of view of the spot belonging to Israel was utterly and unarguably ridiculous. Someone changed the label on the table row from "Syria" to "Israel." It's ridiculous because the point is NOT the lowest spot in Israel; Israel has a far lower spot.

Somebody rightly fixed that; unfortunately, it was by deleting the whole entry in the table--not a good solution at all. Even if the spot in question is not in Syria, Syria must still have a lowest point. (Yes, the table omits those countries whose lowest point is sea level, but even outside the territory in question, Syria has land that's below sea level.)

I've been meaning to implement a solution, but I haven't gotten around to it. There's a reason I've hesitated. It's based on a fact of geography that would be unarguable and uncontroversial. Unfortunately, I gleaned the fact by poring over a topographic map--not from some authoritative source. So I'm afraid it might be Original Research. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:11, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All right, I did something that I hope will satisfy all but the most fanatical of partisans in the matter. When I figure out how, I'm going to try to sort references (actually, just one reference) from explanatory notes. Uporządnicki (talk) 11:02, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CIA:Syria:[1] "lowest point: unnamed location near Lake Tiberias -200 m" --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 11:37, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that this is not needed:[2], there is no reason to excluded the Golan from consideration. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 11:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm inclined to agree. But there's been this battle going on. Once or twice, someone removed the table listing altogether--apparently based on the notion that the lowest point is sea level. Then most recently, someone changed the label in the table from Syria Israel. That's absurd, of course; even if we consider that land Israel (which only Israel does), Israel has far lower land elsewhere.

In some cases, the article might be protected. But it seems kind of silly to protect this article. Uporządnicki (talk) 12:34, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, but it is important to note that the shores of Lake Tiberias themselves are NOT Syrian territory, no matter which POV you take with regards to the Golan - there is a 100m wide strip along the NE shores that is territory that was part of the British Mandate and allotted to the Jewish state in the 1947 partition plan,, which Syria occupied sometime between 1949-1951, and is not considered Syrian territory by anyone other than Syria. Hence the CIA phrasing "location near Lake Tiberias". I'll reword the article accordingly. They think it's all over (talk) 17:56, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Someone is still making a nonsensical, ideologically motivated edit

There's an IP user who made an edit recently; he or she changed the listing for Syria to make it say Israel and show the flag of Israel. I added a note about the Golan Heights controversy--even though some didn't feel it was necessary (I don't think it should be necessary).

The changes make no sense, anyway. First, they give Israel two widely different lowest point; Israel already unambiguously shares with Jordan the lowest land in the world, so a point much higher up is hardly the lowest point. Second, it cuts Syria out of the list altogether--and Syria must have a lowest point.

Similar edits have been made and reverted before. Is there a way to stop a blatant political edit--one that makes no sense--from an IP user? I know that some pages are protected; this does seem a silly page to have to protect. Uporządnicki (talk) 02:35, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Further on this, the IP user has address (or whatever it's called) 85.64.88.165. That person did a similar heavy-handed, ideologically motivated edit in the article for the Sea of Galilee. Uporządnicki (talk) 02:50, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Antarctica

Having a sub-glacial point for Antarctica is illogical - using this logic we should be giving the depth at the bottom of the Dead Sea, not the surface. The lowest accessible point on the Antarctic Continent is in fact Deep Lake,Vestfold Hills, which is at -50 m. Coordinates are 68° 33.5'S, 78° 11.78'E. Don't believe the height that Google Earth gives you. I am an IP-er, but with many year's experience in Antarctic geography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.173.85.66 (talk) 10:54, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]