Stikine River has been listed as one of the
Geography and places good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: October 8, 2022. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from Stikine River appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 9 November 2022 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
The name Stikine doesn't have anything to do with the Tlingit "great river" which would be Héen Tléin. Instead the name comes from Shtax' Héen which has two supposed meanings. The first, and more commonly accepted, is "river cloudy with the spawn of salmon". The second is "very silty river". The former is probably closer to the truth, the latter more likely a misinterpretation of the metaphor given in the former name. Unfortunately places like the National Parks Service and other disseminators of tourist information have perpetuated myths about the name that developed back in the 19th and early 20th centuries, rather than checking with Tlingit speakers who actually live in the area. This is typical.
Perhaps something should be added about the perennial proposals for bridges that would be built from the mainland south of the mouth of the river across the channel to Wrangell. This would include a discussion of the proposed cutoff from the highway that would travel down the river to the mouth.
Also, something should be said about the massive depredation of salmon stocks by fish trap operators in territorial days. The current escapement data from the DF&G would need to be referenced for recovery figures.
— James Crippen 11:37, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Speaking of the fishery, isn't the Stikine fishery covered by the International Joint Commission treaties, i.e. that a share of its fishery (in fact theoretically the largest part of it) belongs to BC? In practicality I think this winds up being a trade-off vs. Alaskan shares in the Fraser/Puget Sound fishery, but in international salmon law fish belong to the country they spawn in. And only a few miles of the Stikine are in Alaska; and even then (as noted now in the article when the boundary was drawn, the boundary was at what was then the mouth of the river, which has since silted in; ditto with the Canadian right-of-navigation on the river, which dates back to the days of Russian America and was affirmed in the 1903 Hayes-Herbert Treaty; hard to imagine the days of heavy steamboat traffic up the Stikine and Iskut, but "was a time...". Skookum1 06:13, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
The annual discharge is on an Environment Canada sitetable; I just wanted to plunk its latlong here so as to get Geohack to show me where it is - 56°42′07″N 132°08′28″W / 56.70194°N 132.14111°W. Skookum1 ( talk) 20:51, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Re the addition of the Canadian English template, and the reversion of "laborious" to "labourious", 99% of the river's length is in Canada, and 99.99% of its drainage basin. Unless a piece of quoted material is in American English, which should remain, the rest of the text of the article should be in Canajun. Convention about this has mostly applied to titles previously, e.g. Okanogan River instead of Canadian spelling "Okanagan" because most of that river's length and is in the US, Kootenay River instead of "Kootenai" because most of that river's length is in Canada. I haven't really looked at the Yukon and Columbia articles in a while, in the Columbia's case it's clearly mostly American, I'm not sure of the length difference of the Canadian portion of the Yukon vs the American length. Skookum1 ( talk) 01:42, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Mertbiol ( talk · contribs) 18:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I have read through this very interesting article. It's well written and generally very clear. I have queries on some of the citations and some suggestions for improving the text (below). Please note that I am from the UK and some of my suggested changes may work less well in Canadian English. Best wishes Mertbiol ( talk) 18:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
{{cite news}}
than with the {{cite web}}
template?That's all for the first pass. Best wishes Mertbiol ( talk) 18:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Thanks @ Shannon1: I have read through the article again and have added a few additional links. There are just two more missing citations:
Other than that, I think the article easily meets the GA criteria, so I will put the review on hold. Best wishes, Mertbiol ( talk) 12:02, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
This is a very interesting and informative article. It is well written and appears to cover all aspects of the river in depth. Congratulations to @ Shannon1: for their hard work to bring this nomination forward. I have no hesitation in promoting it to GA status. Great job!!! Mertbiol ( talk) 10:08, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
SL93 (
talk) 17:26, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Shannon1 ( talk). Nominated by LordPeterII ( talk) at 20:40, 13 October 2022 (UTC).
According to these legends, Great Glacier once spanned the entire width of the lower Stikine Riveron page 1. Combine that with
At one place, there, in the river, the river flowed under a glacierfrom the other source and it should give ALT1. But maybe ALT0 is actually more interesting, since it's not merely a legend. – LordPeterII ( talk) 16:15, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
Stikine River has been listed as one of the
Geography and places good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: October 8, 2022. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from Stikine River appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 9 November 2022 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
The name Stikine doesn't have anything to do with the Tlingit "great river" which would be Héen Tléin. Instead the name comes from Shtax' Héen which has two supposed meanings. The first, and more commonly accepted, is "river cloudy with the spawn of salmon". The second is "very silty river". The former is probably closer to the truth, the latter more likely a misinterpretation of the metaphor given in the former name. Unfortunately places like the National Parks Service and other disseminators of tourist information have perpetuated myths about the name that developed back in the 19th and early 20th centuries, rather than checking with Tlingit speakers who actually live in the area. This is typical.
Perhaps something should be added about the perennial proposals for bridges that would be built from the mainland south of the mouth of the river across the channel to Wrangell. This would include a discussion of the proposed cutoff from the highway that would travel down the river to the mouth.
Also, something should be said about the massive depredation of salmon stocks by fish trap operators in territorial days. The current escapement data from the DF&G would need to be referenced for recovery figures.
— James Crippen 11:37, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Speaking of the fishery, isn't the Stikine fishery covered by the International Joint Commission treaties, i.e. that a share of its fishery (in fact theoretically the largest part of it) belongs to BC? In practicality I think this winds up being a trade-off vs. Alaskan shares in the Fraser/Puget Sound fishery, but in international salmon law fish belong to the country they spawn in. And only a few miles of the Stikine are in Alaska; and even then (as noted now in the article when the boundary was drawn, the boundary was at what was then the mouth of the river, which has since silted in; ditto with the Canadian right-of-navigation on the river, which dates back to the days of Russian America and was affirmed in the 1903 Hayes-Herbert Treaty; hard to imagine the days of heavy steamboat traffic up the Stikine and Iskut, but "was a time...". Skookum1 06:13, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
The annual discharge is on an Environment Canada sitetable; I just wanted to plunk its latlong here so as to get Geohack to show me where it is - 56°42′07″N 132°08′28″W / 56.70194°N 132.14111°W. Skookum1 ( talk) 20:51, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Re the addition of the Canadian English template, and the reversion of "laborious" to "labourious", 99% of the river's length is in Canada, and 99.99% of its drainage basin. Unless a piece of quoted material is in American English, which should remain, the rest of the text of the article should be in Canajun. Convention about this has mostly applied to titles previously, e.g. Okanogan River instead of Canadian spelling "Okanagan" because most of that river's length and is in the US, Kootenay River instead of "Kootenai" because most of that river's length is in Canada. I haven't really looked at the Yukon and Columbia articles in a while, in the Columbia's case it's clearly mostly American, I'm not sure of the length difference of the Canadian portion of the Yukon vs the American length. Skookum1 ( talk) 01:42, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Mertbiol ( talk · contribs) 18:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I have read through this very interesting article. It's well written and generally very clear. I have queries on some of the citations and some suggestions for improving the text (below). Please note that I am from the UK and some of my suggested changes may work less well in Canadian English. Best wishes Mertbiol ( talk) 18:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
{{cite news}}
than with the {{cite web}}
template?That's all for the first pass. Best wishes Mertbiol ( talk) 18:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Thanks @ Shannon1: I have read through the article again and have added a few additional links. There are just two more missing citations:
Other than that, I think the article easily meets the GA criteria, so I will put the review on hold. Best wishes, Mertbiol ( talk) 12:02, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
This is a very interesting and informative article. It is well written and appears to cover all aspects of the river in depth. Congratulations to @ Shannon1: for their hard work to bring this nomination forward. I have no hesitation in promoting it to GA status. Great job!!! Mertbiol ( talk) 10:08, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
SL93 (
talk) 17:26, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Shannon1 ( talk). Nominated by LordPeterII ( talk) at 20:40, 13 October 2022 (UTC).
According to these legends, Great Glacier once spanned the entire width of the lower Stikine Riveron page 1. Combine that with
At one place, there, in the river, the river flowed under a glacierfrom the other source and it should give ALT1. But maybe ALT0 is actually more interesting, since it's not merely a legend. – LordPeterII ( talk) 16:15, 29 October 2022 (UTC)