Talk:Dam

Proposed merge

I've proposed a merge of Environmental impacts of dams into Dam. The Environmental article seems like a fork, possibly POV in nature (see WP:CFORK). Previously, the Environmental article was in this article as a section, but was repeatedly removed because it had copyright violations. The current article does not appear to have the same problem. Thus, there's no reason not to incorporate it into this article. Thoughts? ZueJay (talk) 02:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Sure, that makes sense. You should merge it in as an "Environmental Impacts" section.

WikiReaderer 23:36, 22 October 2007 (UTC) Oh, its already been done. That'll teach me to read the whole article before commenting, hopefully... WikiReaderer 23:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Steel Dams

The section says "Only two examples remain in the US." Does this mean that there are only two examples and both are in the US, or that of those that remain, only two are in the US? Suggest clarify or remove. Ei2g 15:12, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Spotlight

Merge: Environmental_impacts_of_dams

We chose not to participate in the merger of said article and Dam due to two main reasons. The first is the obvious severe lacking in sources in the proposed. The second reason is that the proposed article has enough potential to isolate itself from Dam. We felt that with expansion (which is needed) and sources, the article could easily sustain itself.--danielfolsom 00:32, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed per discussion - FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 00:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Note -- also merged Earthen dam per same discussion. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 00:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

What discussion? Where? Who's we? ZueJay (talk) 19:14, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

We - is WP:Spotlight - which worked on this article, we're just explaining why we didn't move it. This isn't an official thing - with suppurt you could still do the move - however it seems that with FT2 and myself not being for the move - you don't have support.--danielfolsom 20:50, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I understand who "we" is, now. Where is the "discussion" that ya'll have alluded to regarding this proposed merge? I'd like to read it. Or is that couple sentences above it? ZueJay (talk) 21:07, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Oppose. Environmental impacts of dams has potential to be separate article. Merge with Dam will create too long article, which is against general policy of Wikipedia. Beagel (talk) 16:38, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Categorization inconsistency - to research and fix

The article has stated that there are masonry (arch/gravity) and earthen type dams, and timber dams.

1. What category are coffer dams usually considered to fall into (CITE needed)
2. How are dam structures actually categorized? is the article correct?
3. Are the categorization groupings used, recognized and sourcable, or WP:OR?

--FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 00:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

The user Danielfolsom is removing all attributions from not American origin. I added examples of a specific type of dams, protection against sea inundations, which is completely different from flood protection and he removed it twice as he did earlier with the explanation of the origin of te word Dam. My examples are very relevant, the first example refers to the most costly project ever on earth (not the race to the moon as many Americans think), the second to (one of) the longest dam(s) in the world (32 km) and the third to a still existing dam (800 years old) that is close to the original meaning of the word dam. Im my opinion are te actions by Danielfolsom close to vandalism. I will add the removed parts again and suggest a blocking of Danielfolsom when he removes it again.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Robvhoorn (talk • contribs)

First of all, again, sign your post with four tildes; second of all, you didn't mention anything about cost in the first example - nor did you have the source to that, so it's irreverent. Then the next addition you had was duplicating a section called "Flood prevention" - jsut so you could talk about one dam, which wasn't the point of the table. Flood prevention of sees is still flood prevention. I re-added the dam you listed in the duplicated section, however, to the table in the correct, original area. Thirdly, your suggestion about the American bias is not thought through. You say I have removed all examples, yet you provide only one diff- yours. I reverted you because you duplicated a section, but again, I added the dam that you gave - that's not American bias at all - and I would ask you not to make personal attacks (WP:PA)--danielfolsom 17:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Goin' with the lo-flow

No mention of low-flow dams? I understand they're designed not to form reservoirs, but work more like weirs. Can somebody confirm? Add info? (I've tried tracking some down with no success...) Trekphiler 10:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I know how you feel, but I don't know anything about them. 04:51p.m., 07/11/08(GMT)--DJackD (talk) 06:53, 7 November 2008 (UTC)DJackD

Trekphiler, What is a low-flow dam? 03:12p.m., 08/11/08 (GMT)--DJackD (talk) 05:16, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

The only experience I have had is in flood prevention in which low dams with relatively narrow, usually V shaped orifice plates are placed downstream of wide and unpopulated sections of flood-plain. In potentially flood conditions these act as brakes on the flow downstream causing substantial ponding within the flood plain which then slowly drains away as conditions return to normal. I suspect that they are becoming less common as all the flood plains (in Europe) are becoming covered in development and farmers resent their fertile fields being drowned for a couple of months in the winter. Velela (talk) 22:46, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Can't tell you much more than I have already. I've heard the term, & seen it proposed to generate power without flooding land in northern Canada, as opposed to the northern Manitoba experience (for instance) which is (almost) universally decried as stupid. I've seen refs to them (can't name any offhand), but none of the people/orgs I've emailed could tell me more. TREKphiler ^{hit me ♠} 01:46, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Failure detection systems

While living in the City of Monterey Park, California, there was a minor. failure of the clay core dam owned by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. The probable cause was movement from earthquakes. The result was that flows through the clay core of Garvey Reservoir undermined foundations of houses downstream from the reservoir. The MWD proposed plastic lining to prevent further leaks. I put a recommendation into the Environmental Impact Report for sensors to be placed between liner layers so that a leak could be detected. This was was implemented by court order, and as far as I know is the first such leak sensor system implemented to detect failures. Saltysailor (talk) 05:10, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Dam creation: Common purposes

I propose turning the table about common purposes of dam creation into organised paragraphs with their corresponding subheadings as to provide more information in a clearer way, instead of just being a table with a couple of examples, because I think the article does not provide sufficient information about this. --Wikiean (talk) 20:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the table is hard to read and does not present the information in the best possible way. –Mattisse (Talk) 21:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Temporary dams

Get a few mentions in passing but more is probably needed.Geni 04:28, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

If revising it might be worth adding something about inflatable dams (Fabridams). John Dalton (talk) 07:12, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Dam safety

It would be interesting to have some coverage of how dams are inspected and maintained for safety, and what the risks are. [1] and [2] might be good starting points for research. -- Beland (talk) 09:08, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject?

I just finally thought of a place to suggest already proposed WikiProject Dams, which has been proposed for about 1.5 months already. Because dams are such a large topic, it's interesting that there are no banners on any dam article talk page... See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Dams. If anyone has a comment, could they please post a reply here, on my talk page, or on the page above? themaee^talk 18:35, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

"Roman period"?

In the "History" section, it reads "The oldest surviving and standing dam in the world is believed to be the Quatinah barrage in modern-day Syria. The dam is assumed to date back to the reign of the Egyptian pharao Sethi (1319–1304 BC), and was enlarged in the Roman period and between 1934-38." Somehow, I doubt that the Roman period was in the 20th century. This statement needs to be corrected, but I don't know when the correct dates would be. Help? Bricology (talk) 23:18, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

 :D , further more Sethi's page leads to an Indian surname, and i don't think that roots back to an Egyptian pharaoh. i guessed probably Seti I, but his reign didn't begin until at least 1294 BC. i will look again after this statement in the history page. Khaled Khalil (talk) 21:23, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Embankment/Gravity Dams

Hello. Could someone explain the differences between Embankment and Gravity dams? I don't seem to be able to find it within this article. Thanks. Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 07:18, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Embankment dams are constructed with earth, rock and in general 'particles'. Gravity dams are solid and normally made of concrete. Both use their weight for support. The embankment dam article explains it better.--NortyNort (talk) 09:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh I see. Thanks. Guess we should mention that somewhere in the article. Kind regards. Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 09:21, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Harbaqa Dam, Syria. Pic 02.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Harbaqa Dam, Syria. Pic 02.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:22, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

World capacity

One thing missing is the estimated total capacity, and perhaps current approximate storage, of all the world's dams. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.41.222.1 (talk) 03:43, 23 November 2011 (UTC)