Talk:Ravenna Creek

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ravenna Creek article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

United States: Washington / Seattle Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington - Seattle (assessed as Low-importance).

Rivers Low‑importance

	Geography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

Merge suggestion[edit]

The Ravenna Neighborhood articles Neighborhoods of Ravenna Creek subsection seems more appropriate to this article than to the one that it is currently in. Anyone have a strong opinion on the matter or want to perform this task?
—Asatruer 13:11, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An important consideration that should be made clear in both articles is that the living creek exists only because enough people in the neighborhoods cared enough to do the organizing, build the stewardship, and do the work of restoration, all now twenty years on for Ravenna, and much remains incomplete. The City has subsequently come along, at least partially.

For that reason, the # Neighborhoods of Ravenna Creek section is appropriate in the article for each of the listed neighborhoods, with a {{See also|Ravenna Creek}}.

The fundamental problem with excising daylighted urban creeks from their neighborhoods is that doing so is quite misleading. Such daylighted streams very much do not exist in living form independent of the stewardship of their neighborhoods.

Carefully considered organization would be required. However, once done, the pattern could be applied in general to articles about neighborhoods and daylighted urban streams. --GoDot 14:21, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]