|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the River article.|
|Archives: Index, 1|
|River has been listed as a level-3 vital article in Geography. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.7 / Vital|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any threads with no replies in 3 months may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
Define 'river basin'
I suggest write the definition of river basin : the territory that receives originally the river water. Mac 18:24 10 March 2003 (UTC)
Images (again) and GA status
This article really ought to be brought up to GA status in my view. As a starter for that I am proposing to try and get consensus on the images illustrating it. There has been much debate in the past mostly at times when the article has become overwhelmed with a clutter or often poor quality images that just happened to be of rivers. I am proposing that we develop a consensus on what the images should show and, having agreed that, we then look to agree which images satisfy the those criteria. As a starter for ten I am proposing that:
- At the top a superb quality image of a river that will knock'em dead in the aisles.
- a young river just forming, perhaps from a glacier
- a torrential mountain stream
- a meandering river
- a great continental river (Amazon, Nile, Mississippi etc.)
- a river delta
- a river in flood
- a river in drought
- an ephemeral river filling for the first time that season.
- a braided river
- a sink hole
- an underground river (perhaps emerging from a cave)
- a polluted river
- a mill race
- an in-river hydroelectric plant
- a weir
- pleasure boating
- white water kayaking and/or rafting
- commercial shipping on a navigable river
- pleasure fishing
- commercial fishing
- log transport
- water abstraction
- a river bore
- river organisms (plants and animals)
- Some of the ideas you set out for images are already implemented in river ecosystem (though I don't favour stripping that article to get good images for this one). The article should be developed with an eye on "river ecosystem" as a companion article. --Epipelagic (talk) 01:05, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Great. Do you have any image files in mind? I might also suggest an artesian spring. This might be handy source of images. Also the angel falls might be good http://www.flickr.com/photos/capiotti/7088669753/sizes/o/in/set-72157627378840726/ Chogg (talk) 20:41, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
PS Are there still plans to move forward with this article? I'd be keen to be involved, although I need to finish my phd first! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chogg (talk • contribs) 20:42, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Longest River Is The Amazon
- All this needs is a citation and it is good to add to the article! 18.104.22.168 (talk) 10:53, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
WHat the heck is a river anyway?
The Wiktionary definition for "river" says that a river has to end up flowing into the ocean or an inland sea. The definition in this article says that it can be considered "a river" if it flows into another river.
I've searched a dozen online dictionaries - and there is widespread disagreement on this point.
- Consider the Humboldt River, the Sevier River or all the streams of the Great Basin. Are they not rivers? Are the Missouri and Ohio rivers?
- Seems wikt:river is unsourced as are most online dictionaries. Vsmith (talk) 03:14, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
I propose that a "river" should be differentiated from a "stream" based on how old it is. A river channel is a geologic feature and could be considered from a geochronology viewpoint as something that has formed over multiple geologic Epochs. A river could be identified by physical features, originating from previous geologic Epochs, that continue to influence the flow and form of the river. A river channel may have evidence of multiple strata in its deposits and/or physical features that that the river channel superimposes. Streams, therefore, would be identified by limited strata in its channel's depositional record and lack of physical features that the channel predates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 18:43, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Merge here Stream and Watercourse
Both Stream and Watercourse are subsets of this article with no clear differentiation that would enable distinction into separate articles. I suggest therefore that they be carefully and sympathetically merged. Such a merge may indicate the need for one or more sub-articles such as List of name variants for watercourses. Velella Velella Talk 01:15, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support. Makes sense. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 19:27, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support. My dictionary says a stream is a small river, and a river is a large stream - so seems logical. May want to include Tidal river as well...Jokulhlaup (talk) 17:48, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
- Don't merge. Whilst there is no hard and fast definition of river vs. stream, having two articles enables them to focus on complementary aspects as they more or less do at present. "River" focusses on river hydrology in general, whereas "stream" covers aspects of smaller waterways such as their many different names and types of stream (which of course are redirects). They may need tidying up and developing, but it's good to have them separate. "Watercourse" is more problematic as it also includes canals and ditches which are man-made and are not part of the proposed merger. --Bermicourt (talk) 18:17, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
- oppose More pointless make-work from the hat collectors. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:50, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
"OPPOSE" it is important to have a differentiation for the scientific (and un-scientific) fields that are sprining up around this issue. I propose that a "river" should be differentiated from a "stream" based on how old it is. A river channel is a geologic feature and could be considered from a geochronology viewpoint as something that has formed over multiple geologic Epochs. A river could be identified by physical features, originating from previous geologic Epochs, that continue to influence the flow and form of the river. A river channel may have evidence of multiple strata in its deposits and/or physical features that that the river channel superimposes. Streams, therefore, would be identified by limited strata in its channel's depositional record and lack of physical features that the channel predates. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 18:49, 12 January 2015 (UTC)Jason Carey
- Seems the watercourse stub could be merged with stream, but not convinced that the merge with river is needed. As for ip 173...'s comments: please provide WP:reliable sources to support all the "epochs" and "strata in the channels" stuff. Vsmith (talk) 21:20, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
- OPPOSE Merging of River and Stream might make some sense, but not Watercourse.In addition, not all watercourses are streams and rivers (See: Acequia).Kehkou (talk) 21:19, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose — Watercourses include Streams which include Rivers but they are not equivalent and there are no rigid rules separating terminology. An encyclopedia isn't responsible for removing ambiguity and imprecision in the language; only for explaining usage. SBaker43 (talk) 02:19, 20 September 2015 (UTC)