Talk:Falcon International Reservoir

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Oppose, a giant body of water currently a battlefield for the Mexican marines and Los Zetas pirates (see Piracy in Falcon Lake) is certainly notable enough to have it's own page. Maybe the dam article could be merged here, just a though.--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 06:34, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Oppose Does the nominator of the merge have rationale? Certainly notable for seperate articles. In general I don't oppose separate dam and reservoir articles as long they aren't stubs. A piracy article separate from the reservoir may be too much.--NortyNort (Holla) 07:24, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so, one article for the piracy, and one for the lake. Piracy in Somalia and Piracy in Nigeria (as well as other areas) all have their own articles, these pirate incidents should have one too. Especially since it is a significant campaign/event in the Mexican Drug War and piratical/military events involving the lake are almost certain to continue, thus allowing for the expansion of the page (a battle occurred on the lake just a few days ago leaving 13 people dead). Heck the piracy on Falcon Lake is more notable than the lake itself, so it would seem. Thanks for responding so soon though.--$1LENCE D00600D (talk) 11:20, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Interestingly, there isn't a mention of Falcon lake in the Mexican Drug War article. I am not saying that to refute its notability but surely it deserves a sentence or two. I believe the person who tagged the article wanted to merge the dam article into the reservoir one though. That I am opposed to.--NortyNort (Holla) 22:09, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Rationale for the merger: The same body of water has 2 separate articles: Falcon dam vs. Falcon reservoir. Exact same place. Exact same subject. What is your rationale for not merging them? Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 01:47, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
The article on the dam is primarily on a structure, not a body of water. A reservoir is a product of a dam and has different functions and purposes. As such the articles are different. In a dam article, you discuss the structure, background, history, etc. In the reservoir article, you discuss reservoir-related aspects such as geography, recreation, biology, shoreline, fishing, etc. There are many instances on Wikipedia where a dam and the reservoir it creates have seperate articles. Such as Hoover Dam, Pensacola Dam, Davis Dam, Don Pedro Dam, Shasta Dam, Oroville Dam, New Melones Dam, Smith Mountain Dam, etc. There are not two articles in every case; when both can be substantial, there can be two. In this particular case, the dam article is substantial enough to be stand-alone. I see no reason to merge it into the reservoir article.--NortyNort (Holla) 04:00, 12 May 2011 (UTC)