![]() | Merrimack River was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
![]() | The contents of the Merrimack River Watershed page were merged into Merrimack River on September 28, 2017. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Confusingly, the Thoreau article mentions "A Week on the Concord and Merrimac Rivers" (not Merrimack).
What is correct?
S. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.168.172.214 ( talk) 14:23, 30 January 2003 (UTC)
What does "old Celtic language" mean? Is this some sort of proto-Celtic language that has only been posited, or does it mean old Welsh, old Scots, old Gaelic, what? 172.175.127.8 06:05, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've tweaked the different-spelling explanation yet again, hopefully to remove confusion (note that I returned Thoreau's book title to its original spelling; hopefully the note near the beginning will remove confusion). I also put in the Indian naming etymology, as referenced by the Merrimack River Watershed Authority, and removed that Celtic reference, since I know of no historical connection between old Celtic terminology and New English river naming (unless you're one of those America's Stonehenge true believers!) - DavidWBrooks 13:39, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Congratulations! Your article is a great start on this waterway. As you think about improving it, please add a few more inline references to support the facts. Also, check out Ohio River, Mississippi River and others for ideas on expanding the article. -- CTSWyneken (talk) 21:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
This article has been brought up for delisting at Good Article Review because it does not meet the following criteria at WP:WIAGA:
As someone born in Nashua and raised in Hudson NH, I wish this article was better. I may improve it myself in the future, but I must admit, this is well below GA level. -- Jayron32| talk| contribs 06:01, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
A strong consensus of editors has proposed that this article be delisted from the Good Article list, as it does not meet the good article criteria at this time. For an archived discussion that arrived at this decision, see: Wikipedia:Good article review/Archive 17. If this article CAN be brought up to standard, please feel free to renominate it in the future. Good luck and happy editing! -- Jayron32| talk| contribs 18:46, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I know this is going to get some people excited. I'm moving this out prior to replacing it with one that cites sources:
The problem is, I can't find out who on earth believes what is affirmed to be believed. I did a search on that weird name and all I can find on it is a series of copied web sites, which all use the same name and all use the same words with minor variations. This is a copyright violation of some sort on their part. Here it is uncited. Frankly it looks like original research by some eager beaver anxious to add his interpretation of a possible Indian name to the pile. Since Algonquian is imperfectly known and that name is imperfectly known it is not possible to say with certainty what it means or what its original form was in English phonetic spelling. If there is an author of that name or if anyone knows the author of that name theory let him speak up. Otherwise I must take it as original research slipped in there casually without references. As for the Euro-American, what kind of hoaky term is that? It is part of the copyright violation. And those assertions of the original spelling totally contradict the sources I can find. And as for the modern names reflecting the ancient usages, well, no evidence. Pure guess work. I'll be replacing this with new paragraphs today. Dave 12:26, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Considering the flood of '07 and especially those of '36, '38, and 1852, don't we spend too much time on this one event that just happened to be a big deal to us at the time? I think we need to say a lot less about this one flood, and a little more about historic flooding and what has been done to the river to control it. Thoughts and/or volunteers? Thanks, CSZero ( talk) 17:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
There were conversations on the Merrimack Valley (Massachusetts) and Merrimack Valley (New Hampshire) articles about merging the two. Since they are recognized regions of their respective states, I figured the merge was incorrect, but what may be correct is to put the common history here - hence, tagging the History section for expansion. There is a lot more that can be said about the history of the river and life along it. Entire books have been written about the precontact/contact period alone. As for the cleanup tag, the part that needs to be cleaned up is the flooding section. As I mentioned above, the section is way too focused on one particular flood event. I think the tags were therefore warranted. Are you contesting any of this? CSZero ( talk) 23:27, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Please look at the Merrimack Valley article. This article does not seem well named. In Massachusetts we use this specific term in one way, in New Hampshire we use it another way, and people familiar with geography and topography use it another way! Given the variety of ways in which this term is used, perhaps Merrimack Valley shouldn't be a regular article, but rather should be a disambiguation page.
Please see the discussion at Talk:Merrimack_Valley. RK ( talk) 17:49, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
I've never used a talk page before, but there is something in this article which i must address. There is a photo, "View from River Street in Haverhill, Massachusetts." This photo was taken near where the Friend's Landing gay club used to be, which is across from Central Plaza, which is on Water Street, NOT River Street. I have changed this a few times in the last year or so, and it keeps changing back to River Street. Please note this picture is of Water Street.
Thank you, Haverhill Resident. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.74.8.247 ( talk) 14:27, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Can someone please add this data? It seems to exist for many articles about river systems. Cbmccarthy ( talk) 11:36, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
I moved a just-placed aerial photo of the mouth of the river into the Infobox, since it is informative of the size and development of the Merrimack, and moved down a pretty but uninformative shot of the river in Lowell. - DavidWBrooks ( talk) 12:17, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
![]() | Merrimack River was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
![]() | The contents of the Merrimack River Watershed page were merged into Merrimack River on September 28, 2017. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Confusingly, the Thoreau article mentions "A Week on the Concord and Merrimac Rivers" (not Merrimack).
What is correct?
S. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.168.172.214 ( talk) 14:23, 30 January 2003 (UTC)
What does "old Celtic language" mean? Is this some sort of proto-Celtic language that has only been posited, or does it mean old Welsh, old Scots, old Gaelic, what? 172.175.127.8 06:05, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've tweaked the different-spelling explanation yet again, hopefully to remove confusion (note that I returned Thoreau's book title to its original spelling; hopefully the note near the beginning will remove confusion). I also put in the Indian naming etymology, as referenced by the Merrimack River Watershed Authority, and removed that Celtic reference, since I know of no historical connection between old Celtic terminology and New English river naming (unless you're one of those America's Stonehenge true believers!) - DavidWBrooks 13:39, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Congratulations! Your article is a great start on this waterway. As you think about improving it, please add a few more inline references to support the facts. Also, check out Ohio River, Mississippi River and others for ideas on expanding the article. -- CTSWyneken (talk) 21:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
This article has been brought up for delisting at Good Article Review because it does not meet the following criteria at WP:WIAGA:
As someone born in Nashua and raised in Hudson NH, I wish this article was better. I may improve it myself in the future, but I must admit, this is well below GA level. -- Jayron32| talk| contribs 06:01, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
A strong consensus of editors has proposed that this article be delisted from the Good Article list, as it does not meet the good article criteria at this time. For an archived discussion that arrived at this decision, see: Wikipedia:Good article review/Archive 17. If this article CAN be brought up to standard, please feel free to renominate it in the future. Good luck and happy editing! -- Jayron32| talk| contribs 18:46, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I know this is going to get some people excited. I'm moving this out prior to replacing it with one that cites sources:
The problem is, I can't find out who on earth believes what is affirmed to be believed. I did a search on that weird name and all I can find on it is a series of copied web sites, which all use the same name and all use the same words with minor variations. This is a copyright violation of some sort on their part. Here it is uncited. Frankly it looks like original research by some eager beaver anxious to add his interpretation of a possible Indian name to the pile. Since Algonquian is imperfectly known and that name is imperfectly known it is not possible to say with certainty what it means or what its original form was in English phonetic spelling. If there is an author of that name or if anyone knows the author of that name theory let him speak up. Otherwise I must take it as original research slipped in there casually without references. As for the Euro-American, what kind of hoaky term is that? It is part of the copyright violation. And those assertions of the original spelling totally contradict the sources I can find. And as for the modern names reflecting the ancient usages, well, no evidence. Pure guess work. I'll be replacing this with new paragraphs today. Dave 12:26, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Considering the flood of '07 and especially those of '36, '38, and 1852, don't we spend too much time on this one event that just happened to be a big deal to us at the time? I think we need to say a lot less about this one flood, and a little more about historic flooding and what has been done to the river to control it. Thoughts and/or volunteers? Thanks, CSZero ( talk) 17:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
There were conversations on the Merrimack Valley (Massachusetts) and Merrimack Valley (New Hampshire) articles about merging the two. Since they are recognized regions of their respective states, I figured the merge was incorrect, but what may be correct is to put the common history here - hence, tagging the History section for expansion. There is a lot more that can be said about the history of the river and life along it. Entire books have been written about the precontact/contact period alone. As for the cleanup tag, the part that needs to be cleaned up is the flooding section. As I mentioned above, the section is way too focused on one particular flood event. I think the tags were therefore warranted. Are you contesting any of this? CSZero ( talk) 23:27, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Please look at the Merrimack Valley article. This article does not seem well named. In Massachusetts we use this specific term in one way, in New Hampshire we use it another way, and people familiar with geography and topography use it another way! Given the variety of ways in which this term is used, perhaps Merrimack Valley shouldn't be a regular article, but rather should be a disambiguation page.
Please see the discussion at Talk:Merrimack_Valley. RK ( talk) 17:49, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
I've never used a talk page before, but there is something in this article which i must address. There is a photo, "View from River Street in Haverhill, Massachusetts." This photo was taken near where the Friend's Landing gay club used to be, which is across from Central Plaza, which is on Water Street, NOT River Street. I have changed this a few times in the last year or so, and it keeps changing back to River Street. Please note this picture is of Water Street.
Thank you, Haverhill Resident. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.74.8.247 ( talk) 14:27, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Can someone please add this data? It seems to exist for many articles about river systems. Cbmccarthy ( talk) 11:36, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
I moved a just-placed aerial photo of the mouth of the river into the Infobox, since it is informative of the size and development of the Merrimack, and moved down a pretty but uninformative shot of the river in Lowell. - DavidWBrooks ( talk) 12:17, 29 March 2021 (UTC)