|WikiProject Lakes||(Rated B-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject United States / New Hampshire / New Hampshire Mountains||(Rated B-class, Low-importance)|
|It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in New Hampshire may be able to help!
Squam Lakes vs. Squam Lake
There is both Little Squam Lake and Big Squam Lake, true, but everybody calls the big one "Squam Lake", which is why I changed it to singular. I'm waffling slightly on this point now, though ... I guess it depends on what we want the Squam page itself to be: Squam Lakes, with separate entries for big and little inside that page, or Squam Lake, talking about the big one, with a link to a separate Little Squam Lake? Hmmm ... - DavidWBrooks 17:05, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Communities around the lake
The communities were not alphabetical, so there was no order to the list. I ordered the list clockwise from the southermost town of Alton. I'm open to discussion about this. JJ 17:19, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks David. Better sentence structure. JJ 23:44, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
Lakes Region section
This section is weak. What are the summer troupes? What are the specific water and land activities? Also, what's the source of the 1,300 lakes and ponds number? I'd like to see some references. JJ 23:51, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- The state has 1,300 lakes and ponds , I don't know about the rest. Assawyer 00:19, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Link to winnipesaukee.com
I changed the editorial by 184.108.40.206 from "The most popular Lakes Region site" to "A popular Lakes Region site." I don't like broad claims without some underlying justification. Anyone disagree? JJ 17:05, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
I was trying to add a link to a very popular and useful site on Lake Winnipesaukee.. additionally, the most popular (can be verified) site for the lake is http://www.winnipesaukee.com, far more than lakewinnipesaukee.net.
How do I add these.
This page begins with the sentence:
Reading that, I was skeptical on both the claim of being a natural lake and being the sixth largest within the United States. So I checked and it appears that both claims are false.
"Natural lake" is not defined here, but I am guessing it means a lake that is not dammed, whose waters, area, flow, etc, are not controlled by humans. As it turns out, "Lakeport Dam", located between Winnipesaukee's Paugus Bay outlet and Opechee Bay, does control the water level, flow, etc, of Winnipesaukee:
Above link includes text like: "Though DES endeavors to keep the lake as full as possible, traditionally inflows are less during the summer months and the lake level drops several inches from the June 1st level. Releases at Lakeport Dam are managed to achieve the target levels, as well as to provide the minimum flow of approximately 250 cfs into the downstream river system."
There is a second dam at the outlet of Opechee Bay, Avery Dam. From the DES website: "The level of Opechee Lake is maintained at a relatively constant level throughout the year through a combination of hydroelectric energy generation and a system of automated leaf gates along the crest of the Avery Dam. For inflows up to a maximum of 700 cfs, the turbines at Avery Dam self-adjust to pass exactly what is entering the lake, and the net effect is a level reservoir."
Finally, http://www.des.state.nh.us/Dam/graph.htm webpage contains links and info on Lake Winnipesaukee's dams and drawdowns and reservoir stats.
Winnipesaukee River also mentions the dams.
So while the lake may have been there before these dams were made, I'm not sure it is quite accurate to call it is "natural lake", especially when making the claim of being the sixth largest natural lake in the United States. If nothing else, Paugus Bay is now part of Winnipesaukee thanks to the Lakeport Dam.
Second, sixth largest? A quick bit of research makes me think this is way way off. Some lake size info from wikipedia:
- Lake Winnipesaukee, 72 sq mi
- Lake Michigan, 22,300 sq mi
- Utah Lake, 151 sq mi (note page claims "natural lake")
- Pyramid Lake, 188 sq mi
- Lake Tahoe, 192 sq mi
- Lake Okeechobee, 730 sq mi
- Lake Pend Oreille, 148 sq mi
- Lake Pontchartrain, 630 sq mi
- Moosehead Lake, 120 sq mi
- Upper Red Lake and Lower Red Lake in Minnesota are both very large, but wikipedia's pages for them are redirected in error to towns
- Yellowstone Lake, 136 sq mi
- Lake Winnebago, 215 sq mi
- Flathead Lake, 191.5 sq mi
- Mille Lacs Lake, 207 sq mi
- Iliamna Lake, 1,000 sq mi
And many others. These lakes are all at least as "natural" as Winnipesaukee.
Something I've been finding on wikipedia is the abundant use of superlatives (biggest this, largest that, etc), which if one looks into it, are quite often false or at best highly qualified (largest this of type that before year X by people Y, etc). Perhaps better to say things like "very large" or "one of the largest" rather than putting an exact rank on it. Pfly 04:31, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Removed the claim. Maybe it came from the linked-to www.lakewinnipesaukee.net, which states: "Lake Winnipesaukee is the largest lake in the state of New Hampshire and the 6th largest lake in the United States that lies within the boundaries of one state." A different but similar claim. That claim seems false too. All of the lakes listed above are larger and completely within one state, except Lake Michigan and Lake Tahoe. Superlatives are the 3rd most frequent kind of misinformation on the web! Pfly 02:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
I threw in a much more modest size comparison -- third-largest in New England. I couldn't find any list out there of lake sizes nationwide, but thanks to Pfly's research, there's clearly no point in trying to hold Winnipesaukee up to some sort of national superlative. Even outside of New England, you start hitting larger lakes: Oneida Lake in New York is bigger, for example. Also, SatyrTN's right about Winnipesaukee being a natural lake. The NH Department of Environmental Services puts it in the category "Raised by Dam"; i.e. the lake would still exist if you removed the dam (and you wouldn't lose very many acres, either). --Ken Gallager 14:09, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
"Official Lake Winnipesaukee Website (lakewinnipesaukee.net)" I wonder what makes this website official other than its self-claim of being official. It looks like a sponsored, real-estate oriented business/tourist website. "Official" would mean, seems to me, some kind of government sponsorship, rather than real estate companies. I tried to find something on the website that explained why it was "the official website" of the lake, or even something-- anything-- about the group that put the site together and runs it, but found such information lacking or hidden away. ...anyway, it doesn't look very official to me. Pfly 20:34, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed. I've removed "official" (and am tempted to remove both "Lake Winnipesaukee" websites). -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 20:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
- Yes - I did the same thing (that is, removed "official") a little while ago. Since the lake doesn't have a single government, it's almost impossible for it to have an "official" web site. They are both pretty good websites, although they don't add much beyond the article. - DavidWBrooks 22:09, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
- By the way, the anon who added the word "official" (220.127.116.11) has stuck similar wording in every article about NH towns in the area ... Rollback time; sigh. - DavidWBrooks 22:10, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
- And now he/she/it is back, as User:18.104.22.168 - DavidWBrooks 17:41, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- Heh, I noticed.. someone trying to drum of business for the businesses advertising on the .net site perhaps. Or, giving the benefit of the doubt, maybe someone who doesn't know how to read talk pages or edit summaries. Pfly 18:00, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- And now he/she/it is back, as User:22.214.171.124 - DavidWBrooks 17:41, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
I staggered the placement of images in this article to move from right to left, right to left. To me, it improves the aesthetics. Do others agree or disagree? JJ 19:26, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
American Express Commercial
I'm having a hard time writing up the comment about the commercial and the mention of Lake Winnipesaukee. Despite this, someone changed my initial entry to remove the point about Lake Winnipesaukee. Here's hoping someone can write up a good piece about this commercial, and hopefully we can find the commercial online (or someone can put it up). --The Dopefish 01:07, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
On the page list of cryptids, under G there's a cryptid called "Glow Man" which is said to be a legend of the area around this lake, and the article for glow man redirects here, but nothing is said about it here. --Penguinofhonor (talk) 22:26, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- That's because somebody added one sentence about "glow man" at one point but didn't provide any references. A Google search on "glow man" and "Winnipesaukee" only brought up a couple of sketchy-looking "legends" sites, with no local documentation. There's certainly nothing from the New Hampshire press or published authors. You might want to adjust the list of cryptids accordingly.--Ken Gallager (talk) 13:53, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
In popular culture
Do we really need this section? The lake is mentioned in a book from 1938? Mitt Romney aided someone who's boat capsized? Heck, one of them is about Squam and only *mentions* Winnipesaukee. Thoughts? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:18, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- Popular culture sections can be valuable because they demonstrate how much a place/subject/person has permeated general society. It's certainly relevant that Winnipesaukee is known well enough to be mentioned in various places whereas, say, Third Connecticut Lake isn't. BUT ... and this is a big "but" ... they are very hard sections to keep organized and relevant; they easily turn into trivia pits. Some wikipedians throw up their hands at the possibility of keeping pop-culture sections in good shape and just delete them; I think that's throwing the baby out with the bathwater. They often do need to be trimmed, however, and I think you've spotted some trimmable areas here. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 17:11, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
The new pronunciation was added as /ˌwɪnɪpəˈsɔːki/, but I question the accuracy of /ɔː/ as the vowel. People from New Hampshire have the cot-caught merger but not the father-bother merger and would most likely be pronouncing it the vowel as /ɒː/. I live on a neighboring lake and this matches my pronounciation much better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Weebro55 (talk • contribs)
- "ɔ" (as in "fraud") is the more general pronunciation. I live near the lake, and I've occasionally heard "ɒ" (as in "father"), but only from people with strong local accents. --Ken Gallager (talk) 12:22, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
- "ɒ" would be the vowel in bother, not the vowel in father. My point is that local accents, strong or not, shouldn't have the vowel "ɔ" at all. The word fraud would have the same vowel as cot and hot so it would still sound accurate to locals who use "ɒ" but would give a different pronunciation to people that do have "ɔ".