|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Levee article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Levee has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Technology. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as Start-Class.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|A fact from Levee appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 8 February 2007. The text of the entry was as follows: "Did you know
- 1 Merge
- 2 Higher-high tide
- 3 More info
- 4 Merge?
- 5 New Orleans in 1672?
- 6 Levee vs. Dike
- 7 Levee as protector???
- 8 What is a levee?
- 9 a levee is....
- 10 Army Corps
- 11 Merged
- 12 A dyke is used to regulate water levels
- 13 The dyke and ditch combination
- 14 Strengthening dykes with trees
- 15 It's spelled "dike," not "dyke"
- 16 Artificial Levees - History
- 17 Merge from Bunding
- 18 Levee, levy and British variations
- 19 Bund alarm
- 20 EWN
- 21 Debris flows
- 22 Geology
- 23 Requested move
- 24 Major overhaul
- 25 Pronunciation
- 26 tagging
I don't think dike should be merged with levee. Levee is an American term. HoppinHill 13:41, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Could someone please clarify: the article on dikes says that dikes and levees are the same thing and then continues to state that the oldest dikes were built in the Indus valley. This article says that the oldest levees were built along the Nile 3,000 years ago. What's going on here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 19:30, August 26, 2007 (UTC)
The question was asked in one of the edits what is a higher-high tide ... unfortunately the tide article does not cover in detail the differences in tides, but the short answer is the higher-high tide (HH) is the higher of the two high tides experienced in a tidal day. In mid-latitutdes there are two high tides and two low tides. These tides are further differentiated by adding "higher" or "lower". These designations are important in this article because levee overtopping is more likely to occur on a HH tide. What needs to be done is the tide article needs to be fixed (I've been creating a cartoon targetting the general public to illustrate flood and ebb tides along with the tides for tidal estuaries) -- but I think the levee article should stay as is, and any discussions of the physics of tides should be reserved for articles on tides. MCalamari 16:27, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
There is much more to be said about levees than the article mentions. The name of natural levees is misleading. It is true that the river banks are frequently higher than the flood plains, but that does not mean that they are levees, because practically they do not protect the flood plains against flooding, even for low floods, because in most cases they are not continuous and there are areas where the water can flow into the plains. One of the important problems in levees is the settlement of the levees. Therefore the compaction of the earth is extremely important. This is not mentioned in the article. Talking about protection, it is not only grass or concrete which is used for the protection. Stones and boulders are frequently used. The plantation of willows is not generally accepted as a good solution. Willows do not have deep roots and can pe uprooted by the floods. If this occurs, the hole in the embankment can be a weak spot leading to the breach of the dyke. The breaches of the embankments should be explained. First of all it should be understood that there is not 100% sure embankment, there is always a calculated risk of failure. There are discussions about the causes of the failure of the New Orleans embankment due to Katrina. However, regardless of the class of hurricane which occured in 2005, there definitely was a possibility of a worse hurricane hitting the area, with higher water levels which would have overtopped the embankment. All this has to be explained. And much more.
Afil 18:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
I think dike should not be merged with levee, because levee, though technically a type of dike, has all sorts of associations with the word that are primarily American and dike has all sorts of associations with the word that are Dutch. Considering the fact that the Dutch dike Stelling van Amsterdam is on the World Heritage list, I think you should keep the word dike. Jane 07:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- I disagree. Levees are a huge issue in California and other parts of the United States, where the term dike is not used by the media nor by technical firms involved in flood control work. An example of this is shown in the levee article itself where common langauge road sides are marked as being "levee roads". Even pop culture frequently uses the term levee (see Led Zep's song "When the Levee Breaks"). MCalamari 19:34, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I think there is a misunderstanding here. I never said that the article on Levee should go, I simply feel that a separate article on 'Dike' should stay. The legend of the boy with his hand in the dike is older than the levees of California. For cultural reasons, the word 'Dike' is important in and of itself. Jane 05:59, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- I think both articles should stay too. In fact, the bottom of each article can (and probably should) contain a link to the other. :) MCalamari 16:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Agree the articles should not be merged. While there is some overlap, there are also distinctions-- for example, does one speak of the high ground formed by the natural dike of a river? -- Infrogmation 04:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Against merge. Each page sits well and deserves its own space. Cuvette 21:20, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding here because of local interpretations of the word "dike". Outside the US (e.g. the UK), the word dike is certainly not only a ditch, but more usually an artificial or natural slope above ground level, just like a levee. The BBC use it alongside "levee", usually "levee" for US reports and "dyke" for other country reports. A BBC quote: "In Lyon County, Nevada, about 3,000 people were stranded after a levee, or dyke, along a canal broke early on Saturday, authorities said, and in parts of the town of Fernley water was up to 3ft deep." 126.96.36.199 (talk) 21:58, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
If nobody thinks a merge is a good idea, should I remove the tags? Addhoc 22:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Never heard of a Levee before I came here from a crosslink. Dijk or Dike or Deich is the more common word to me and I am originating closer to france then to the netherlands. Further I can only second that Dijk has nothing to do with a ditch! If anything has to happen, then make a forward from Levee to Dike. Everything else is just poor. -- ([188.8.131.52]) 16:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC-4)
New Orleans in 1672?
The article cites the term "levee" as being traced back to New Orleans in 1672, but Iberville and Bienville did not establish the city until 1718. Even the term was in use by the local population in 1672, New Orleans did not yet exist. Wistlo (talk) 02:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)wistlo I agree that the word levee should not be associated with the word dike/dyke (which ever spelling you prefer) on account you dont here the word levee in the eastern hemisphere as it is heard often in the western the word dike/dyke refers to the structures in Europe that kept water out of the low lying land. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 15:23, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Levee vs. Dike
Sorry, I'm a little confused. I see from the merger discussions above that Levee and Dike are apparently two different things. If this is the case why is the sentence "It is known in Europe as a dike." included in the opening paragraph? Mutt (talk) 06:07, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed. I see a lot of people wanting to keep the dike and levee articles separate, but I don't understand why. If they're synonyms, they ought to be discussed in a single article. If the only difference between a dike and a levee is what dialect of English you speak, then keeping the articles separate is completely ridiculous. OTOH, if there is some meaningful, non-linguistic reason to keep the articles separate, then this article should explain what that is. Since both this article and Dike (construction) link to the same article on the German Wikipedia, that really makes me wonder if there is truly a non-linguistic difference between a levee and a dike. RobertM525 (talk) 08:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Since a dike and a levee are simply two different local names for the same thing, I suggest merging the articles. For now I merged the text of both articles so that they are identical, apart from the wording "dike" and "levee", and the introduction about the origin of the words. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 00:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- Well now the articles are identical they should be merged before further edits are made. My preference is to merge them under the more international term Dike, what do others think? Mutt (talk) 21:00, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- When choosing a common article title the following rules should be followed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Opportunities_for_commonality
- "Wikipedia tries to find words that are common to all varieties of English. In choosing words or expressions, especially for article titles, there may be value in making choices that avoid varying spellings, where possible. In extreme cases of conflicting names, a common substitute (such as fixed-wing aircraft) is favored over national varieties (fixed-wing aeroplanes [British English], and fixed-wing airplanes [American English]). If a variable spelling appears in an article name, redirect pages are made to accommodate the other variants, as with Artefact and Artifact, so that they can always be found in searches and linked to from either spelling. Sensitivity to terms that may be used differently between different varieties of English allows for wider readability; this may include glossing terms and providing alternative terms where confusion may arise. Insisting on a single term or a single usage as the only correct option does not serve well the purposes of an international encyclopedia. Use an unambiguous word or phrase in preference to one that is ambiguous because of national differences. For example, use alternative route (or even other route) rather than alternate route, since alternate may mean only "alternating" to a British English speaker."
- Both "Levee" and "Dike" appear to fail these criteria. "Levee" because it is not a common word outside the United States. "Dike" because it is ambiguous, or even means something different to Americans. Mirriam Webster defines a levee as an embankment for preventing flooding; a dike as a bank usually of earth constructed to control or confine water; an embankment as a raised structure (as of earth or gravel) used especially to hold back water; Oxford Dictionary defines a dike as an embankment built to prevent flooding; a levee as an embankment built to prevent the overflow of a river; an embankment as a wall or bank built to prevent flooding by a river. I therefore would suggest "Embankment (dike or levee)" as the common title.18.104.22.168 (talk) 01:26, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
- Am I the only person who thinks that doing a "copy-and-paste" and "find-and-replace" edit to both articles was a rather... "haphazard" solution? It just doesn't strike me as the best way to go about trying to merge the articles... RobertM525 (talk) 08:02, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Levee as protector???
In the present edition, the article looks self-contradictory. It does not explain the main reason to build up levees at a river as protection against floadings. The levees may simplify delivery of water from the river to the fields, while the water is wanted. As for a river that is danger with floadings, the building up the levees looks like making a hole in the bottom of a boat, as an intent to release the water out. Why, when, how the construction of levees is better than just deepening of the river? Where does the rainwater go, while the river, squeezed between the levees, flows above the mean level of ground? Why this rainwater is not supposed to cover the land around worse, than the river without levees? dima (talk) 09:50, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
What is a levee?
This line: "The main purpose of an artificial levee is to prevent flooding of the adjoining countryside; however, they also confine the flow of the river resulting in higher and faster water flow." would be far better placed higher up the article rather than after the long-winded explanation of the origins of the word?? 22.214.171.124 (talk) 10:41, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
a levee is....
I think it's worth mentioning that while the Corps did design the New Orleans levees, and supervise their construction by contractors, the majority of the levees were turned over to local ownership upon completion. This is the common practice - a community requests flood control assistance from the government, the Corps builds a levee, for which the government pays 80% and the community 20%, and then turns ownership, and therefore responsibility for maintenance, over to the community. The unfortunate truth is that many communities do not properly maintain the levees, which weakens them. This was the case with many of the levees that breached in New Orleans.Virginia Ryan (talk) 16:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- Some good points, except for that in New Orleans maintanance was not a factor in the great levee disaster of 2005, but rather bad design, as multiple studies have shown. See 2005 levee failures in Greater New Orleans. -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:43, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
On both sides of the Atlantic dikes and levees are build to keep the people behind it safe. As it seems its just two names for the same thing. The easy alternative - a neutral title - is not available. Continuously watching two articles to ensure coherence does not provide a long term perspective. Since the history of both terms is also covered, the title does not really matter - and the winner is: levee.Inwind (talk) 20:38, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
- A dyke is essentially a different thing. There are dykes that are built to ensure that water is maintained at a raised level while there is no consideration of keeping the low lying area safe.. A dyke can raise water level by as much as only a meter. This current article about the notion of a levee is at odds with the perception that I have of a dyke. A dyke is not only made of ground and the notion that the ditch dug to create a dyke is also part of the dyke is completely foreign to me. You have to appreciate that not all types of earth are suitable for dykes. When you have a dyke there are many consideration on how such a dyke is to be maintained. A modern dyke in the Netherlands is likely to have a layer of stone to prevent shear?.
- The article is also lacking in that it does not explain how dykes break. The proccess of water saturation and nl:kwel are essential in understanding dykes and levees. Occurrences of flooding should not be part of this article. It is not relevant to the understanding of the subject. GerardM (talk) 11:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
A dyke is used to regulate water levels
A dyke is not necessarily to prevent flooding. There are also dykes that keep water within the confines of a dyke. So while many dykes exist ony for flood control, it is not so by definition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GerardM (talk • contribs) at 06:06, 1 March 2009
The dyke and ditch combination
When the waterlevel is higher then the landlevel, water will seep through to the other side. This water needs to be drained because otherwise it will undermine the dyke. Particularly in the case of an emergency, you want to have access along the length of a dyke. It is for this reason that ditches ensure dry ground. It is said that in Dutch the dyke and the ditch are considered to be the same. I would like to see proof of that in Dutch. I doubt this very much. GerardM (talk) 00:45, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Strengthening dykes with trees
If you want to have sound dykes, trees are your worst enemy. They effectively undermine the construction of a dyke. It is for this reason that sheep are kept on dykes.. "four golden legs and a golden mouth" They keep the grass close cropped and they press the ground together. They eat all the tree shoots. GerardM (talk) 00:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Artificial Levees - History
This section states the following:
Levees were first constructed in the Indus Valley Civilization (in Pakistan and North India from circa 2600 BC) on which the agrarian life of the Harappan peoples depended. 
Later on, however, it states:
However others point to evidence of large scale water-control earthen works such as canals and/or levees dating from before King Scorpion in Predynastic Egypt during which governance was far less centralized.
- Actually, we also have this statement in the "History" section:
- The inhabitants of the Indus Valley Civilization built the first dikes in the world around the 1st millennium BCE. This was the same period when the dockyard at Lothal was in operation. The use of dykes became known from then onwards.
Alright, here we go:
Many of the oldest Sumerian words refer to dikes and channels (http://www.sumerian.org/prot-sum.htm) and your basic non-compound words like eg appeared, at the extreme latest, in the 3000's BCE.
- Agreed. There were already established requests suggesting that this 'Levee' article be split because of possible multiple meanings already present, so adding another meaning into here seems the wrong direction. I'm reverting both 'Levee' and the earlier 'Bunding' article to their previous states. The editor is welcome, and invited, to open a discussion about merging. Feline Hymnic (talk) 19:00, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose merge. Levee is the geography of natural riverine features (sometimes with human assistance), bunding is very often small-scale civil engineering or facilities management. When bunds are a notable topic in sizes down to 210 litres, they don't sit easily in an article on the Mississippi delta. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:35, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose merge. As per Andy Dingley. Levees are primarily about pre-existing natural rivers etc.; by contrast bunds are about any sort of liquid in newly-generated tanks. These are two separate topics, albeit sharing some commonality, for which a 'seealso' tag from each to the other might be appropriate. Feline Hymnic (talk) 18:48, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Levee, levy and British variations
Re this removal of "levy" as a claimed British variant spelling.
Levees are admittedly rare in the UK, although there's a good example of a constructed raised levee alongside the Gloucestershire side of the Severn estuary, around the Oldbury area.
The etymology of the word "levee" stems (according to the OED) from a French loanword "levée" of 1770 related to the Mississippi and the then-French territory. This was anglicized to "levee" and appears first in American English, simply not being required in British English for some considerable period. It is however, now established and well understood.
"Levy" (in this sense) is only noted by the OED in passing, as a cite from the 1883 Encyc. American (NB, American, not British) as a commonly used alternative spelling, but still not a recognized one. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:36, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
- There are two probably somewhat different points here:
- The use of the word "levee" in Britain is, I think, very rare. The nearest most of us come to it is hearing news reports from the USA. (Analogous to (US) sidewalk and (UK) pavement; or (US) car hood and (UK) car bonnet. Oscar Wilde: "Two nations divided by a common language".) The common phrase here is "river bank". The emerging question seems to be: Is there any significant difference between a (US) "levee" and a (UK) "river bank"? If they are the same then the current "River bank" WP entity, currently a redirect to Bank (geography) should probably redirect to "Levee". But if there is a significant difference, then the "Levee" Wikipedia article ought to explain it.
- If, as I believe, "levee" is rare in the UK, then the claimed "levy" spelling for that particular usage (river containment etc.) is an order of magnitude rarer still.
- I suggest we concentrate on the former question (US levee vs UK river-bank), and not be distracted by the latter ("...y" spelling variant).
- Feline Hymnic (talk) 21:58, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
- "Levee" in British English is uncommon, but not rare. Owing to the smaller scale of British geography there are fewer levees in existence, but when it's necessary to discuss them, this is the word used. There's no other word used for this specific feature, there's no alternative spelling of it. Nor is "levy" isn't credible as an alternative: it would be several orders of magnitude less common and it appears to be an Americanism, if anything.
- River banks aren't levees. Levees might be a form of river bank, but they're only one narrow and specific form. Certainly not a good topic for merging or redirection. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:48, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. What, then, is the difference between a river-bank and a levee? I (as a Brit!) have the gut feeling that a river-bank is basically natural with human enhancement whereas a levee has a much higher proportion (majority? entirely?) of the "human enhancement" factor. Is that right, nearly right, not really right, totally wrong? (And the answer of course, should form part of some Wikipedia article!) Feline Hymnic (talk) 00:09, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
- That rather suggests we need to improve the article intro then!
- A levee, as the French origin suggests, is a river bank that has been artificially raised to resist flooding, such that the bank forms a ridge higher than the surrounding land.
- It's arguable (I may be wrong here, I'm not a hydrologist) that levees (ie the raised bank) might also be formed naturally by deposition on banks. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:01, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
- All levees are river banks, but not all river banks are levees. To me, the defining feature of a levee is that it is raised higher than both the bankful level of the river on one side, and also the flood plain on the other side - regardless of whether it's natural or artificial. Natural levees are a consequence of inundation of the floodplain by flooding rivers with high suspended sediment load, i.e., meandering, lowland rivers; the flow velocity falls as the depth falls, so the coarsest of the suspended sediment drops out immediately adjacent to the river, and this builds the levee over time and with many flood events. This will tend to reduce the likelihood of future floodplain inundation (and can result in crevasse splays where the levee breaches if and when it does happen). FWIW, I'm British, and have done plenty of stuff on rivers, and have never seen it spelled anything other than "levee". The word "levy", AFAIK, refers only to a tax! If it can be used interchangeably, that's definitely archaic usage. DanHobley (talk) 04:03, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Just a brief note, before you decide on any merges... FWIW, I stumbled on the Bunding article, because I was looking for a definition of what constitutes a Bund Alarm (which, in turn, led me to this discussion). When searching for "Bund alarm" in a well known search engine, the first 10 results were all commecial products. They are all for monitoring the amount of oil in an oil tank (including fuel in a fuel tank). TheAMmollusc (talk) 11:39, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
In Revision as of 01:20, 31 August 2008 User:126.96.36.199 added some text including "(EWN)" at the end of one paragraph. Looks like it might be a ref of some sort but a cursory google didn't find anything.
Any reason not to remove it?
Would be good if the article could also refer to the natural levees built up around debris flows. I'll do this if and when I get the time, but anyone else feel free in the meantime! DanHobley (talk) 03:53, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
I've added this article to WP Geology. This should induce some sedimentologists to head over and run a critical eye over the natural levees section, which needs some TLC. Hope that's OK with all. DanHobley (talk) ??:??, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- Significant rewrite for clarity on natural levees now complete. All info should still be there. DanHobley (talk) 03:31, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
If there are no objections i'm going to over haul this article if no one objects in a day i will go ahead with my changes to the lead section and rewrite multiple sections. --Jeffrd10 (talk) 16:36, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
I am tagging core articles with really short leads for Wikipedia:Take the lead!. I have no idea about the fragment and apologise for inadvertently reinserting it, but am trying to highlight broad articles for the competition. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:14, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- So just what is wrong with the existing lead? What it missing from it? Andy Dingley (talk) 13:25, 15 December 2015 (UTC)