This is a
WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate!
|
This is the
talk page for discussing
WikiProject Rivers and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Rivers Project‑class | |||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 270 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 7 sections are present. |
Myself and User:Alansohn had a discussion about the inclusion criteria for US watershed templates, which sometimes go beyond listing just rivers, lakes, and tributaries, and also include populated places and landmarks, some of which are located nowhere near water:
If "watershed" is a geographic term referring to a drainage basin, would watershed templates be improved if they only included links to rivers, streams, and so forth? Thanks. Magnolia677 ( talk) 17:50, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Let me try to summarize the discussion so far in my odyssey to determine what should be included in a watershed template (in addition to rivers, streams, and lakes): pollution, water supply, flooding, subsurface flow, water rights, notable navigational landmarks visible from the water, and populated places that could in some way be impacted by their placement within a watershed. Ok, I get it. What about water towers? Every community has at least one water tower, and they all literally pump water right out of the watershed and store it in a big tank. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:04, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
but unsure exactly how. See (and direct replies) to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China#Wei? Weeeiii? in a few minutes once I write out the section. — LlywelynII 02:29, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Howard Creek (disambiguation)#Requested move 5 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 17:04, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
Why is it that all streams are categorized as rivers when rivers are only a type of stream? Like the stream article claims, long, large streams are usually called rivers while smaller, less voluminous and more intermittent streams are known as streamlets, brooks or creeks. It seems to me that there should be categories for each type of stream rather than categorizing every stream as a river which seems erroneous to me. Volcano guy 03:28, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Your input at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wolastoq is welcome. The river flows between Canada and the United States. Magnolia677 ( talk) 22:42, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
The Wayback links to the reference text Watersheds of the world : ecological value and vulnerability in this WikiProject guide are not usable. A scanned copy of the book can be borrowed through the IA: Watersheds of the world : ecological value and vulnerability. 1998. I recommend that we update the links to reference the scanned copy of the book. - DutchTreat ( talk) 12:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
An article which may be of interest to members of this project— Rubicon—has been proposed for merging with Crossing the Rubicon. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. IgnatiusofLondon ( talk) 22:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi,
I am currently editing an article that might interest you, but more importantly I kind of have a dilemma what approach I should take.
So the article in question is River regime. It is not a part of your project as it firstly included only the definition in geology and the other, completely different topic that I set out to expand is about the annual fluctuations of rivers' discharge, sort of like climate is for weather. So these are two completely different topics, so i guess they should be split into two articles with this second being called discharge regime, which is also used. So I have made a template {{ hydrograph}} and set out to expand the article (see my sandbox page). However, I found little sources that focused on the topic in detail globally and none of those classifications seemed to be detailed and particularly good. The part around the Alps (Slovenia and Austria, perhaps also France, but sadly, I don't speak French) seems a lot more developed than other parts and the distinction is also very detailed. Nival/nivo-glacial and glacial regimes are differentiated down to a single month while I failed to find a more detailed description for pluvial regimes than the distinction into three splits (temperate pluvial, mediterranean, and tropical pluvial – misleading as it also appears in China and together with a nival peak even in Russia).
So I set out to erase this inconsistency and I made some special notation that would be objective, detailed and quick to convey the information. I have seen Wiktionary using its own transcription for some Chinese varieties, so I Figured that would not be such a problem. However, then these common names such as glacial and nival also needed special distinctions as in Asia, it happens that the nival and pluvial peak coincide in August or July, which does not occur in Europe; rivers so far towards the poles that they get most of the water from glaciers also needed to fit somewhere, which lead to the current situation where I find myself making more and more subjective decisions, far more than what is probably acceptable for Wikipedia. And I don't want to continue onwards knowing that the edit would probably get reversed anyhow. If you find any other classification that could be used, please let me know.
I think that developing a such system for global classification would be really beneficial and this notation could then also be added to the infoboxes for rivers, because if only what has been published elsewhere is used, the whole topic would be really eurocentric with many different rivers with pluvial peaks (i.e. all those rivers rising in tropical, temperate and most of dry climates) fitting into one of the only three categories while having 10 different simple regimes for rivers in the Alpine region. I have found a source which allows for a quick addition of the regimes and from it, a special article for each of these major groups could also be made as there are trends that can be identified (something similar as in the second part of the sandbox page).
Let me know what you think about this or if I should ask about the issue elsewhere. Garygo golob ( talk) 15:45, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:New River (North Carolina)#Requested move 24 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky ( talk) 14:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
This is a
WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate!
|
This is the
talk page for discussing
WikiProject Rivers and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Rivers Project‑class | |||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 270 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 7 sections are present. |
Myself and User:Alansohn had a discussion about the inclusion criteria for US watershed templates, which sometimes go beyond listing just rivers, lakes, and tributaries, and also include populated places and landmarks, some of which are located nowhere near water:
If "watershed" is a geographic term referring to a drainage basin, would watershed templates be improved if they only included links to rivers, streams, and so forth? Thanks. Magnolia677 ( talk) 17:50, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Let me try to summarize the discussion so far in my odyssey to determine what should be included in a watershed template (in addition to rivers, streams, and lakes): pollution, water supply, flooding, subsurface flow, water rights, notable navigational landmarks visible from the water, and populated places that could in some way be impacted by their placement within a watershed. Ok, I get it. What about water towers? Every community has at least one water tower, and they all literally pump water right out of the watershed and store it in a big tank. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:04, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
but unsure exactly how. See (and direct replies) to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China#Wei? Weeeiii? in a few minutes once I write out the section. — LlywelynII 02:29, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Howard Creek (disambiguation)#Requested move 5 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 17:04, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
Why is it that all streams are categorized as rivers when rivers are only a type of stream? Like the stream article claims, long, large streams are usually called rivers while smaller, less voluminous and more intermittent streams are known as streamlets, brooks or creeks. It seems to me that there should be categories for each type of stream rather than categorizing every stream as a river which seems erroneous to me. Volcano guy 03:28, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Your input at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wolastoq is welcome. The river flows between Canada and the United States. Magnolia677 ( talk) 22:42, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
The Wayback links to the reference text Watersheds of the world : ecological value and vulnerability in this WikiProject guide are not usable. A scanned copy of the book can be borrowed through the IA: Watersheds of the world : ecological value and vulnerability. 1998. I recommend that we update the links to reference the scanned copy of the book. - DutchTreat ( talk) 12:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
An article which may be of interest to members of this project— Rubicon—has been proposed for merging with Crossing the Rubicon. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. IgnatiusofLondon ( talk) 22:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi,
I am currently editing an article that might interest you, but more importantly I kind of have a dilemma what approach I should take.
So the article in question is River regime. It is not a part of your project as it firstly included only the definition in geology and the other, completely different topic that I set out to expand is about the annual fluctuations of rivers' discharge, sort of like climate is for weather. So these are two completely different topics, so i guess they should be split into two articles with this second being called discharge regime, which is also used. So I have made a template {{ hydrograph}} and set out to expand the article (see my sandbox page). However, I found little sources that focused on the topic in detail globally and none of those classifications seemed to be detailed and particularly good. The part around the Alps (Slovenia and Austria, perhaps also France, but sadly, I don't speak French) seems a lot more developed than other parts and the distinction is also very detailed. Nival/nivo-glacial and glacial regimes are differentiated down to a single month while I failed to find a more detailed description for pluvial regimes than the distinction into three splits (temperate pluvial, mediterranean, and tropical pluvial – misleading as it also appears in China and together with a nival peak even in Russia).
So I set out to erase this inconsistency and I made some special notation that would be objective, detailed and quick to convey the information. I have seen Wiktionary using its own transcription for some Chinese varieties, so I Figured that would not be such a problem. However, then these common names such as glacial and nival also needed special distinctions as in Asia, it happens that the nival and pluvial peak coincide in August or July, which does not occur in Europe; rivers so far towards the poles that they get most of the water from glaciers also needed to fit somewhere, which lead to the current situation where I find myself making more and more subjective decisions, far more than what is probably acceptable for Wikipedia. And I don't want to continue onwards knowing that the edit would probably get reversed anyhow. If you find any other classification that could be used, please let me know.
I think that developing a such system for global classification would be really beneficial and this notation could then also be added to the infoboxes for rivers, because if only what has been published elsewhere is used, the whole topic would be really eurocentric with many different rivers with pluvial peaks (i.e. all those rivers rising in tropical, temperate and most of dry climates) fitting into one of the only three categories while having 10 different simple regimes for rivers in the Alpine region. I have found a source which allows for a quick addition of the regimes and from it, a special article for each of these major groups could also be made as there are trends that can be identified (something similar as in the second part of the sandbox page).
Let me know what you think about this or if I should ask about the issue elsewhere. Garygo golob ( talk) 15:45, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:New River (North Carolina)#Requested move 24 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky ( talk) 14:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)