This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Not sure about this. I understand the appeal of something simple but the list here is not so much use, just a list of names, most of which will never have articles. There also looks to be a touch of "ownership" here - the first person to make an article does not own the format / style / content, even more so when another has also been working on the same topic for longer, and many others (on the Category Talk page) for over a year. But for now, doing my bit to update both. Irish-Swede 195.96.72.22 ( talk) 06:54, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, just passing here, adding a little on the Camac / Cammock, and saw this proposal. Having seen both articles, I would merge this simple list into the more comprehensive article, as I don't see much value on a mere alphabetic list (it does not say what is a tributary of what, nor is it referenced), but maybe Wikipedia likes to have both a high-level and a deeper article for such purposes? Best of luck either way, 07:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.133.22.205 ( talk)
Target standards for Wikipedia Lists:
Have you considered adding the Strahler order number also? Classic order is great for clarity of structure, while the Strahler gives a useful indication of accumulation.
I want to look into the option for a feature I usually don't go for, a gallery. For this sort of page, I think it might actually be useful. This area shot, 1-2 wider maps, and some shots of major watercourses. SeoR ( talk) 16:53, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Not sure about this. I understand the appeal of something simple but the list here is not so much use, just a list of names, most of which will never have articles. There also looks to be a touch of "ownership" here - the first person to make an article does not own the format / style / content, even more so when another has also been working on the same topic for longer, and many others (on the Category Talk page) for over a year. But for now, doing my bit to update both. Irish-Swede 195.96.72.22 ( talk) 06:54, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, just passing here, adding a little on the Camac / Cammock, and saw this proposal. Having seen both articles, I would merge this simple list into the more comprehensive article, as I don't see much value on a mere alphabetic list (it does not say what is a tributary of what, nor is it referenced), but maybe Wikipedia likes to have both a high-level and a deeper article for such purposes? Best of luck either way, 07:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.133.22.205 ( talk)
Target standards for Wikipedia Lists:
Have you considered adding the Strahler order number also? Classic order is great for clarity of structure, while the Strahler gives a useful indication of accumulation.
I want to look into the option for a feature I usually don't go for, a gallery. For this sort of page, I think it might actually be useful. This area shot, 1-2 wider maps, and some shots of major watercourses. SeoR ( talk) 16:53, 26 September 2022 (UTC)