Talk:List of divided islands

Islands Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject IslandsTemplate:WikiProject IslandsIslands articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

I know this is a quibble, but I just wanted to put it on the record. The Orinoco River splits into two branches near Tamatama, in Amazonas state, Venezuela. One branch flows north and disembogues in Delta Amacuro state. The other (the Casiquiare canal) flows south and joins the Rio Negro, which meets the Amazon near Manaus, Brazil. In this way, all of the Guianas (Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana) and substantial parts of Brazil and Venezuela are surrounded by river-waters and the Atlantic Ocean, in effect forming a kind of island. If geographers actually considered it an island, at over a million km.², it would be the second-largest in the world. Gwil 06:10, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, there's discussion on this issue at island. Newyorkbrad 16:44, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed this from the list; Guantanamo is merely land leased from the Cubans by the USA, as is done by many states in many countries. Robdurbar 11:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good call there! =J //Big Adamsky 15:14, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a merge proposal which has been overhastily implemented by redirecting this well-established page to a shorter newer page. I have undone it so that the proper procedures can be followed: to avoid hiding the edit history here, the new page should be deleted and this page moved to there. jnestorius^(talk) 13:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support the move; I think it was probably done innocently presuming that there would be no quibbles and therefore no proposal neccesary. --Robdurbar 15:38, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support the merge. Since this is the older page, we should probably just redirect the newer page here. The newer page doesn't have much edit history -- the only major additions were the creation of the page and one edit adding content (both by the same editor). Polaron | Talk 02:01, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about the island in the Aral Sea divided between Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan?

If you have a good source of information about it, put it on the list! (I never knew there was such an island, but of course until a few years ago it would have been entirely within the USSR.) Newyorkbrad 20:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles on source Asia Water Water say the island, Vozrozhdeniye, is shared by the two - but it also says that the shrinking of the Aral Sea means it is no longer an island, but is connected permanently to the mainland. - DavidWBrooks 21:15, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saying that it is permanently connected to the mainland is foolish. NOBODY knows this for a fact. We do not have a crystal ball that will tell us what will happen to that land in 200 years, 500 years, 1000 years, 10,000 years, etc. NOBODY knows if the Russians might undo the catastrophic irrigation projects of the Soviets (which dried up the Aral Sea), or if the rainfall in that area might not increase dramatically. Using the word "permanently" w/o any proof of that fact is a foolish errand. Why isn't this obvious to everyone? Is the splitting of a diamond permanent? Yes, it is. Is the Atlantic Ocean permanently connnected to the Pacific with a canal across Central America? Nobody knows!98.67.97.225 (talk) 05:13, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even though it is no longer an island shouldn't it still be under historical examples?

That sounds like it could be a good place for this one. Maybe add the additional information that DavidWBrooks gave and a link to the source.

I guess if we want to be technical, the question is whether the island was divided anytime before Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan became part of the USSR - or whether it's been an island since 1991 when they became independent ... since between the 1920's and 1991 it wouldn't have been divided.... Newyorkbrad 21:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added it based on the info at Vozrozhdeniya Island. Don't forget that Wikipedia is a useful source of information! jnestorius^(talk) 22:23, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, man, don't use that site for a source; it's not reliable. - DavidWBrooks 23:30, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if the changing level of the Aral Sea has led to any previously submerged areas on the border surfacing as new islands. There are also lakes with fluctuating water levels, like Lake Chad, which might sometimes have temporary binational islands. Another plausible contender is Sarygamysh Lake between Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, looking at the max and min levels on this MSN map. Possibly also Lake Kara Kaldy on the Syr Darya jnestorius^(talk) 22:10, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Northern Ireland flag used in this article is not an official flag - see article Flag of Northern Ireland. Its use here is controversial, not in line with Wikipedia neutrality on such issues and should therefore be deleted. Peter Clarke 11:25, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I actually wonder why there are any flags at all. It all seems repetitive and useless. 71.102.144.120 00:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm travelling the Finland-Russia border loooking for divided lake (or river) islands; there are some candidates where the map scale is too large to rule definitively:

• Possibly Hopeasaari in Korpijärvi [1]
  • IBS 74 says "the frontier [...] passes over the Korpijarvi and Suojarvi lakes so that the northern island in Lake Korpijarvi remains on the Finnish side." jnestorius^(talk) 23:56, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• In Melaselänjärvi (as well as the sure things listed): Karpankari [2]
• Possibly one or more in Virmajarvi [3]

jnestorius^(talk) 02:00, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, in the sea, Koiluoto, Jähi, and a third unnamed islet, in the Gulf of Finland, seem from these maps

• Gulf of Finland islet (SE of Peräluoto) (60°32′09″N 27°46′41″E / 60.535716°N 27.778154°E / 60.535716; 27.778154)
• Koiluoto(60°30′20″N 27°46′16″E / 60.50559°N 27.771226°E / 60.50559; 27.771226)
• Jähi(60°19′31″N 27°36′58″E / 60.325211°N 27.616037°E / 60.325211; 27.616037)

to be divided between  Finland and  Russia. jnestorius^(talk) 06:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• One island in Lake Metigoshe between North Dakota and Manitoba. USGS says no, it's entirely in U.S.: [4]. But North Dakota Game and Fish department says the northern tip is in Canada: [5]. jnestorius^(talk) 22:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look at http://1.usa.gov/12esyDi, which clearly shows that the northern tip is just over the border in Canada. The http://www.nd.gov/gis/mapsdata/ site states: "Here you will be able to create maps, browse data, and extract data from the North Dakota GIS Hub," and "The [North Dakota] Hub Explorer is a browser-based interactive mapping tool that displays GIS Hub layers, grouped by data category. With this tool you can zoom, pan, query, print maps, and download vector data. The Hub Explorer has been tested on a number of browsers including Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome, and with limited testing on Opera and Safari. "

Jeff in CA 17:05, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

• Island in the Columbia River between Washington and British Columbia [6].
• Possibly island in a salt lake between North Dakota and Saskatchewan, though the lake looks dry 48°59′58″N 104°18′38″W / 48.9994°N 104.31057°W / 48.9994; -104.31057. jnestorius^(talk) 23:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to the divided islands in the Lake of the Woods? The NASA imagery access from the Northwest_Angle article shows number divided islands. --Kvasir 09:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe there are any. Images that superimpose map features on satellite images never align them perfectly. Check out The topozone maps; it's clear following the border that it avoids all islands. jnestorius^(talk) 14:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Lake Rychy [7] 55°42′15″N 26°40′57″E / 55.704145°N 26.682444°E / 55.704145; 26.682444.
• This wee lake [8] 55°53′39″N 27°37′43″E / 55.894037°N 27.628641°E / 55.894037; 27.628641.

• Island on Maritsa river - [[9]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sashabolgar (talk • contribs) 18:11, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only two islands at Islands Divided by International Borders from www.worldislandinfo.com are not currrently listed on this wiki page. These are:

• 14. island in Purnujarvi, 61°15'N, 29°10'E, Finland - Russia, c. 40 acres/c. 15 ha. 61°15′N 29°10′E / 61.250°N 29.167°E / 61.250; 29.167 is in Lake Hiijarvi, [10]. Purnujarvi is west of Hiijarvi and entirely within Finland [11]. I think the island being referred to is Suurisaari within Hiijarvi, but the border expressly avoids this islands (see the map, and also International Boundary Study No. 74: "Hence the frontier runs in an agreed straight line in a northeasterly direction to a point on the western shore of the Karsalampi pond, intersecting Lake Hienjarvi (Hiidenjarvi) and leaving the Suurisaari island on the Finnish side."). I think this is just a mistake from using a map with too large a scale. (Google Earth draws a straight line border through Suurisaari.) worldislandinfo: A Note on Sources
• 21. middle island, Södra Boksjön, Norway - Sweden, 0.2 acres/0.1 ha. The space between the 2 bigger islands doesn't contain any land visible on any maplink I found, except possibly as a tiny speck on norgesglasset at 59°00′55″N 11°42′19″E / 59.0153763°N 11.7053619°E / 59.0153763; 11.7053619. That speck seems too small even for 0.1 hectare, but, assuming it is a piece of land, the map doesn't show the full extent of the Swedish portion. I'm reluctant to add it without better evidence.

BTW the coor template link is currently broken: I hope it comes back soon... jnestorius^(talk) 00:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added the following sections, based on USSR military maps from the 1980s, but I've removed them again:

• Eleven islands in the Syr Darya between  Tajikistan and  Uzbekistan^[1][2]
• One island in the Amu Darya between  Tajikistan and  Uzbekistan (near the tripoint with Afghanistan)^[3][4]
• Many islands in the Amu Darya between  Tajikistan and  Afghanistan^[5]

I removed them as I'm not sure they are still correct, or indeed ever were.

1. The former Soviet republics may have renegotiated borders (with each other or Afghanistan) since independence.
2. The islands may be shifting sandbanks as in the Ganges chars.
3. The Afghan border marked in the maps contradicts the International Boundary Study^[6], which says it follows the thalwegs. The map border appears to be the midpoint of the various braided channels.
4. The 1:100,000 maps quoted somewhat contradict the 1:200,000 maps; for example the TAJ-UZB island off the tripoint on the 100k map^[3] but includes the tripoint with AFG in the 200k map^[7].
5. The map sites also keep disappearing. I was under the impression the maps were out of copyright, but it looks like someone is hunting them down. (Not that that renders them inadmissable; you can always check them out in person in UC Berkeley.)
6. (Also, many of the  Tajikistan- Afghanistan islands are in the Panj River, not the Amu Darya which is name for the lower reaches.)

jnestorius^(talk) 20:17, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a past contributor to this article i haven't visited this article in a few months. Wow! Congrats with the flags and percentage counts. Excellent additions including many lesser known entries on the list! Good job! --Kvasir 06:09, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(This section is here because some sections have been removed from the Main page to the Talk page)

Searching Google for Pollatawny leads me only to this page, I would expect it mentioned somewhere else, does this place really exist?

It's a tiny islet in a small lake. You can see it here by searching for townland Tober (DED Cavangarden, E.A. Donegal) and zooming in on Lough Vearty. I wouldn't link to that site on the article page as it's not intended as a general map reference; but it should convince you the place exists. jnestorius^(talk) 13:36, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That islet is visible in this photo: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lough_Vearty_-_geograph.org.uk_-_884141.jpg

Jeff in CA 01:27, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Should Cuba be listed? The U.S. controls Guantanamo Bay. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 02:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Already mentioned in the "See also" section of the article and dicussed earlier on this Talk: page jnestorius^(talk) 10:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, I don't know how I missed that. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 12:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've somewhat undone User:3meandEr's recent edit regarding Cyprus.

• The earlier edit summary that "Cyprus for instance is not separated by an international border as such" is incorrect in that Akrotiri and Dhekelia are recognized by Cyprus and internationally as British sovereign territory. This fact also obviates the need to qualify "divided ... by an international border" with "or de facto occupation." If we open the door to de facto occupations, cases like Guantanamo Bay and Tamil Eelam start to muddy the waters further.
• I agree that "both POVs need to be stated" though I'm not sure POV is the best term; de jure/de facto seems to be more accurate. In any case, I think listing Cyprus under both 3 countries and 2 countries achieves this. That's not to say there is no room for improvement; see the following

Currently the listing under "three countries" just points to the listing under "two countries", which gives both breakdowns, thus:

• Cyprus - de facto between three countries, de jure between two: see next section

• Cyprus - De jure between the Republic of Cyprus (97%) and the United Kingdom (controlling the UK sovereign bases of Akrotiri and Dhekelia; 3%)
  • de facto there is also the unrecognized Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus in the part of the island militarily occupied by Turkey (de facto 36%), together with a United Nations administered buffer zone (de facto 1%), separating the part controlled by the government of the Republic of Cyprus (de facto 61%) from the Turkish-occupied part. The remaining is occupied by the UK sovereign bases of Akrotiri and Dhekelia (de facto 2%)

An alternative would be to give the relevant breakdown under each, thus:

• Cyprus - de facto divided between the unrecognized Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus in the part of the island militarily occupied by Turkey (de facto 36%), together with a United Nations administered buffer zone (de facto 1%), separating the part controlled by the government of the Republic of Cyprus (de facto 61%) from the Turkish-occupied part. The remaining is occupied by the UK sovereign bases of Akrotiri and Dhekelia (de facto 2%)

• Cyprus - De jure between the Republic of Cyprus (97%) and the United Kingdom (controlling the UK sovereign bases of Akrotiri and Dhekelia; 3.0%)

---

Personally, I prefer the current version, as I think putting it all in one place avoids the danger of someone only reading one half and being irritated by the perceived imbalance/inaccuracy/incompleteness. But that's just my opinion. jnestorius^(talk) 22:37, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand how the British bases on Cyprus can be both de facto and de jure? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.219.116.67 (talk) 10:59, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Situations, facts, et cetera, occur all the time that are both de jure and de facto. This ought to be obvious to anyone, and this is the best possible case. For example, Ottawa is both the de jure and de facto capital city of Canada, and likewise for Paris and France; and Washington, D.C., and the United States. In contrast, Bolivia has the de jure capital city of Sucre but the de facto capital of La Paz.98.67.97.225 (talk) 05:37, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I much prefer the current set-up, in nice easy bullet points. It seems to get lost in the prose above. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 11:09, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that a user doesn't understand it suggests that it is not quite as easy as you assume. "Things should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." jnestorius^(talk) 12:19, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean the IP (?), that would require explaining what de facto and de jure were, which is not the point of the page. They are appropriately wikilinked. That being said, more text might be good, just not in a paragraph form like above. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 12:27, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IP means "Internet protocol" and also in the terminology of the U.S. Air Force, IP means the "initial point" of a bombing run. Do not go around using acronyms and abbreviations without explaining what they mean. This applies for 99% of them. You can get away with a few of them like U.S.A., NATO, C.I.A., IBM, DVD, TV, LAN and a few more, but don't even try it with the vast majority of these.98.67.97.225 (talk) 05:37, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It would appear from the listings in this article that Hispaniola is the only divided island in which each part of the island is the entire country. is this the case, and should ths be noted in the article in some way? 216.66.128.209 (talk) 18:32, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Both Haiti and the Dominican Republic have smaller offshore islands, although Hispaniola is the mainland of each. I don't think this trivia is worth mentioning. There is also the marginal case of Cyprus. jnestorius^(talk) 21:50, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A causeway is not an island, and so should not be in this list. However, if perhaps there is an island that the causeway is on that is divided, that could be included. However, as it stands, I don't think that it belongs on the list. Otherwise we could add a great number of bridges from around the world, not a pleasant situation. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 11:13, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have reformatted to make this a bit clearer; it is only Embankment No. 4 which is the (artificial) divided island, not the entire causeway. jnestorius^(talk) 12:19, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have read statements like "divided between nine tribes" in the text. When it comes to statements about sharing things, owning things, etc., in English the correct expression is "divided between" when there are two and only two recipients or owners. In English, the correct expression is "divided among" when there are three or more recipients or owners. I have read or heard thousands of cases (since about the year 2001) in which writers did not follow such rules of writing, speaking, or rhetoric. Actually, they are generally to lazy to be bothered, and they become irritated when someone corrects them. - 98.67.97.225 (talk) 05:59, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct about among/between. Feel free to fix it in the article. Also, will you be irritated if I correct your misspelling of "too" in the last sentence? - DavidWBrooks (talk) 10:55, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There reads: Republic of Cyprus (60%), Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (35%), United Kingdom sovereign bases of Akrotiri and Dhekelia (4%), United Nations buffer zone (3%)
But, these sum up to 102%. Is this rounding problem or simply an error? In the talk page, these are 61%, 36%, 2% and 1% respectively, which gives 100%.
And strangely, the UK bases are listed to be "de jure" 3%, but "de facto" 4%. Can it be right? 85.217.32.113 (talk) 20:51, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt the UK have lost any control over their military bases. CMD (talk) 05:13, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've raised related questions at Talk:Cyprus#What is the area of Cyprus?. jnestorius^(talk) 14:39, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on List of divided islands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060108140521/http://www.ilec.or.jp:80/database/eur/eur48-01.gif to http://www.ilec.or.jp/database/eur/eur48-01.gif

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:24, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of divided islands. 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/20061125225405/http://ngis2.statkart.no/norgesglasset/default.html to http://ngis2.statkart.no/norgesglasset/default.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110812092950/http://bestpravo.ru/fed2004/data03/tex14451.htm to http://bestpravo.ru/fed2004/data03/tex14451.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928031148/http://www.colonialvoyage.com/tobago.html to http://www.colonialvoyage.com/tobago.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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 08:09, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Island name: Nor Romania nor Ukraine call the island Musura Island, but instead K Island or Nova Zemlia (Нова Земля) respectively. Additionally the english name looks to be K island accordingly to wikipedia
Wikilink: Looks to me that the wikipedia article about the island itself is a better choice than the link about the Danube delta.
Given this arguments, I think that both island name and wikilink should be changed Luis wiki (talk) 15:15, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Accordingly to the wikipedia article about the Rotten Sea, it is not a sea , despite the name, but, and I quote, "a large system of shallow lagoons". These lagoons are connected to the Sea of Azov by the Velyke Hyrlo river.
For the sake of consistency, this entry should be moved to the Lake Islands section Luis wiki (talk) 15:15, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I could search there is no evidence of a permanent land border at high tide. Can someone contribute?
I think it is consensual that the this entry, besides being dubious, lacks accuracy. At least it should be more accurate than stating "one of the shoals in Adam's Bridge"... Which one? Even if it is unnamed, what are the coordinates?
I wonder if this entry should be at all in the list... Luis wiki (talk) 15:15, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]