Talk:Indo-Asia

The "smallest" landmass? Seems like a strange statement to make. And doesn't "subcontinent" need an article? This, that and the other (talk) 06:44, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I simply copied the definitions on when I created this as a main entry and demoted that to an alternative form, because it is much rarer. Feel free to tweak the definitions if you like. Kiwima (talk) 10:24, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I really have no idea what it means. I'm going to send it to the tea room. This, that and the other (talk) 10:45, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

RFV discussion: December 2017–April 2018
Rfv-sense: "The smallest landmass on Earth, consisting of subcontinent and Asia proper; sometimes also including neighbouring islands of the tropics". This is technically "cited", with four cites, but I don't believe that the cites actually support this definition. They simply show that the word exists, and don't really shed any light on its meaning (so in that respect they are quite poor cites). Can we verify that this is actually a meaning of Indo-Asia?

See the following Tea Room discussion:


 * What do you suppose this means? The first cite would suggest it is a synonym for Asia, which matches the part of the definition that says "consisting of [the Indian] subcontinent and Asia proper", but that is irreconcilable with the beginning of that sentence, since Asia is not "the smallest landmass on Earth". Other cites seem to be using the sense to refer to part of Asia. The "Hyponyms" section of the entry just adds to the confusion. This, that and the other (talk) 10:50, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It might relate to the Indian subcontinent and the rest of the continent Asia and could be " The smallest a landmass on Earth, consisting of the Indian subcontinent and Asia proper", i.e. it could be what others simply call Asia. The reason for using Indo-Asia instead of simply Asia could be geological history, moving of landmasses, tectonic plates, etc. Maybe biggest and smallest were confused? Hyponym Europe however wouldn't fit to this. -84.161.36.153 17:08, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm going to send this to RFV, even though it's cited, as I remain entirely unconvinced that the cites support the definition. This, that and the other (talk) 11:39, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

This, that and the other (talk) 11:42, 20 March 2018 (UTC)


 * What other definition do they support??? They clearly refer to a landmass and not a geopolitical entity. If you are looking for cites that define the term, they would be inadmissible because they would be mentions rather than uses. Kiwima (talk) 01:15, 21 March 2018 (UTC)


 * The 2012 cite doesn't fit, IMO; "Ongoing controversies on the timing and kinematics of the Indo-Asia collision" is talking about the collision of India (the Indian continental plate) and Asia, not one thing called Indo-Asia.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:00, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

RFV-resolved. Kiwima (talk) 20:36, 20 April 2018 (UTC)