Talk:Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta: Difference between revisions
m moved Talk:Sacramento River Delta to Talk:Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta: per move request; see talk page for discussion |
closing RM discussion; page moved |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{move|Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta}} |
|||
{{WikiProject California|class=Start|importance=high}} |
{{WikiProject California|class=Start|importance=high}} |
||
| Line 27: | Line 25: | ||
== Requested move == |
== Requested move == |
||
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:polltop --> |
|||
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the {{{type|proposal}}}. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</font> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. '' |
|||
{{{result|The result of the debate was}}} '''PAGE MOVED''' per discussion below. -[[User:GTBacchus|GTBacchus]]<sup>([[User talk:GTBacchus|talk]])</sup> 10:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC) |
|||
<hr/> |
|||
[[Sacramento River Delta]] → [[Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta]] – This delta is a confluence of two rivers, the San Joaquin River and the Sacramento River. Both are major rivers. In fact, I would say that they are the two most important rivers in California. The Sacramento River has a higher flow (I do not know how much higher), but both rivers are extremely important for irrigation, drinking water and hydroelectricity (a lot of the hydroelectricity is generated on their tributaries, but both have a substantial amount of generating capacity on themselves, too). Since one river is not clearly more important than the other, I think that the name of the article should incorporate both names. It seems like people call the delta the Sacramento River Delta or the San Joaquin River Delta depending on the context. For example, if a newspaper article is about the San Joaquin River, the delta would probably be called the San Joaquin River Delta. However, there is precedent for using "Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta". For example, it is used in this San Francisco Chronicle article and in a report by the State of California's CALFED Bay-Delta Program. According to Google, "Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta" is used far more often than "San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta" (39,700 vs. 723 results), so I think we should go with it. -- [[User:Kjkolb|Kjkolb]] 06:20, 21 February 2007 (UTC) |
[[Sacramento River Delta]] → [[Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta]] – This delta is a confluence of two rivers, the San Joaquin River and the Sacramento River. Both are major rivers. In fact, I would say that they are the two most important rivers in California. The Sacramento River has a higher flow (I do not know how much higher), but both rivers are extremely important for irrigation, drinking water and hydroelectricity (a lot of the hydroelectricity is generated on their tributaries, but both have a substantial amount of generating capacity on themselves, too). Since one river is not clearly more important than the other, I think that the name of the article should incorporate both names. It seems like people call the delta the Sacramento River Delta or the San Joaquin River Delta depending on the context. For example, if a newspaper article is about the San Joaquin River, the delta would probably be called the San Joaquin River Delta. However, there is precedent for using "Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta". For example, it is used in this San Francisco Chronicle article and in a report by the State of California's CALFED Bay-Delta Program. According to Google, "Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta" is used far more often than "San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta" (39,700 vs. 723 results), so I think we should go with it. -- [[User:Kjkolb|Kjkolb]] 06:20, 21 February 2007 (UTC) |
||
=== Survey === |
=== Survey === |
||
| Line 34: | Line 37: | ||
=== Discussion === |
=== Discussion === |
||
''Add any additional comments |
''Add any additional comments |
||
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.</div><!-- Template:pollbottom --> |
|||
Revision as of 10:29, 26 February 2007
 | California Start‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
"dirty levees" ? Is that supposed to be "earthen levees" ?
Sacramento River Delta? It's called the California Delta or the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta, you self vanitated morons.
This should be revamped so as to include a discussion of the current crisis regarding possible levee failure. Elijahmeeks 03:55, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- "Self vanitated morons?" That's a little harsh. I will add a section about the possible levee faliures aslong as you don't call me a moron. Rayana fazli 22:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Removed unsourced content
I removed the following, which: 1) was without sources 2) was poorly written 3) used unscientific vocabulary. David.Monniaux 01:33, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger met with Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who had took a tour of the levees in Sacramento to evaluate whether they need federal aid. The governor announced in February that California is in a state of emergency. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, who have been working with the California Department of Water Resources,have identified 24 critical erosion sites in the Delta. If these levees were to fail, the estimated economic costs would be around $30-40 billion. The pressure that have caused the levees to be unstable have been building up for centuries. When the delta's soil reacts with the air, microbes digest the peat and release gas which has built up and caused breeches in the levees. Other reasons for the levees instability have been caused by natural disasters like earthquakes and floods.
No really
I agree with Elijahmeeks, I want, no, request that the goddammed article be renamed "California Delta". Thats the right name. Two rivers (when you look at it, the SJ is only a miles shorter than the Sacramento) both the largest in CA flow to meet together into the SF Bay, does Sacatomatoes need their name on everything?? Man, seriously. You know what, someone should write a better article under "California Delta", and get the current one erased or combined.
-Sincerely Abe
- I partially disagree. I'm a civil engineer working for the State of California and for the past seven years I've been an expert in the "Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta" (in fact, I am the editor of one of the references cited in the current version of this report -- actually I also happened to be the author of that particular chapter as well). That is both its common and legal name. In the Sacramento region it will often also be called "the Delta", but we have to remember that Wikipedia isn't just about California for Californians. An English speaker in Australia might think of some other delta as "the Delta", and thus I honestly think the name of the article is fine. IIRC there are redirects for some other names to this article, and I would not object to you creating a "California Delta" redirect to this article, because there is no other large Delta in California. If anything the articles official name should be "Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta". MCalamari 15:36, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Requested move
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. -GTBacchus(talk) 10:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Sacramento River Delta → Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta – This delta is a confluence of two rivers, the San Joaquin River and the Sacramento River. Both are major rivers. In fact, I would say that they are the two most important rivers in California. The Sacramento River has a higher flow (I do not know how much higher), but both rivers are extremely important for irrigation, drinking water and hydroelectricity (a lot of the hydroelectricity is generated on their tributaries, but both have a substantial amount of generating capacity on themselves, too). Since one river is not clearly more important than the other, I think that the name of the article should incorporate both names. It seems like people call the delta the Sacramento River Delta or the San Joaquin River Delta depending on the context. For example, if a newspaper article is about the San Joaquin River, the delta would probably be called the San Joaquin River Delta. However, there is precedent for using "Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta". For example, it is used in this San Francisco Chronicle article and in a report by the State of California's CALFED Bay-Delta Program. According to Google, "Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta" is used far more often than "San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta" (39,700 vs. 723 results), so I think we should go with it. -- Kjkolb 06:20, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Survey
Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" or other opinion in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
- Support - compare [1] with [2]. --NE2 16:16, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Discussion
Add any additional comments
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.