Template talk:Susquehanna River System/Archive1

Note: this content moved here to show how the template was developed. If there are other questions, please see the edit history at User:Ruhrfisch/Frog. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:13, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

---

I have made these navboxes (with much appreciated help from User:VerruckteDan) starting from the Potomac River model ({{Potomac River System}}) and information from the List of Maryland rivers, List of Pennsylvania rivers, and List of New York rivers, supplemented by including streams shown on the maps at the Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC) website. The division of the Susquehanna drainage basin into six sub-basins follows the SRBC, as well as the Chesapeake Bay Program website.

Questions

I have the following questions that I would appreciate feedback on:

a) Which navbox to use?

I originally thought just to make a navbox for the West Branch Susquehanna River (1), but the list of crossings etc. are for the whole Susquehanna River, so I made the navbox for the whole river (2). That was so big I made the navframe for the whole river (3). I prefer the navframe (3), but could also easily make versions of (1) for each sub-basin, or perhaps one for the whole Susquehanna and boxes for Juniata, West Branch, and Chemung.

I think either the navframe or having a separate one for each sub-basin and then just using the navframe on Susquehanna River would work well.Kmusser 19:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I like the last nav box. It gives lots of info in a small place and expands the scope of a particular stream. It shows how Little Pine Creek is related to the Juniata River. I am just a fan providing more information and links. Dincher 20:20, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for the feedback. I also like the navframe. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

b) What streams to include?

My thought is to include a navbox on every stream in the Susquehanna system. Currently every stream named on the SRBC maps and whatever we have an article for is included in the navboxes. Some of the streams are quite small and I am not sure they need to be included?? Also the Chesapeake Bay website lists more streams and the PA Gazzeteer of Streams II lists even more (there could be 70 streams listed in the West Branch watershed alone).

You do not want to include every one, there are too many. I think what you want is anything that's "notable." You can either leave that ambiguous, or try to come up with a definition for it. For an example of the latter check out List of rivers in New Hampshire. Kmusser 19:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Just the notables should be included. What is notable? That's up for discussion. Little Muncy Creek is. Hagerman's Run, although it's a major drinking water source in Williamsport, is not. There must be some volume, size limit that we could put into place. Dincher 20:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

• I think the size of the drainage basin is probably the best criteria to use here. PA Gazzetteer of Streams II has a cutoff of 25 square miles, but that is too small (70 plus streams in the W. Branch alone). Little Muncy Creek is 82 square miles. White Deer Hole Creek is 67 square miles. White Deer Creek is 45 square miles, and not on the SRBC map, so it might be their cutoff is 50 square miles. Oh wait, Little Muncy is not on the SRBC map either, so I am not sure what their cutoff is. Maybe 40 sq miles, which is about 100 sq kilometers? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:21, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

c) How to show tributary / subtributary / subsubtributary order?

Currently subtributaries are in parentheses, subsubtributaries are in double parentheses and so on. Should there be a key explaining this? I also thought of making regular tribs full size text, sub tribs 90%, sub sub tribs 80%, and anything beyond that 80% and parentheses. Another thought was to use different dividing symbols in the lists | is used now, but * • are also possible.

I do like showing the tributary structure, but I don't think the parentheses are intuitive. I'd be curious what showing it with text size would look like, that might work better. Kmusser 19:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I definetly think that smaller text would be better than the parentheses. Way better. Like Kmusser said the parentheses are not intuitive. They also appear to be clutter. Maybe another color instead of small text. Dincher 20:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

• I switched the first frame (Lower Susquehanna) in the NavFrame over to small for subtribs and parentheses for susubtribs, plus | as dividers within a subbasin and • between subbasins. So for example:

• White Deer Hole Cr. • Muncy Cr. | Little Muncy Cr. • Loyalsock Cr. | Little Loyalsock Cr. • Lycoming Cr. •

Sinnemahoning Portage Creek is a subsubtrib and 73 square miles, so we need something for subsubtributaries. Is a key useful? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:34, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd swap the | and •, I think the | suggests the bigger division, but that may just be me. I think you could just keep decreasing the text size for subsubtribs, as in:

Trib • subtrib • subsubtrib Kmusser 14:24, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I swapped the dot and pipe, but the {{Nowrap}} template does not like <span style="font-size: 80%"> and when I tried just <font-size: 90%>> tags the text is much bigger than the rest no matter what percent I use (or indeed for just <font>). I might just switch to tables and &nbsp; (non breaking spaces) as I think I have to do that for the map images anyway. I will also ask at the nowrap template talk page. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:21, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I think the swap does look better. I don't know about the rest, template syntax is not my strong suit. Kmusser 19:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I also like the swap and am not an expert on syntax but can ask User:VerruckteDan for help. The nowrap talk page was quite inactive so I have not yet asked there. I plan to also redo the Susquehanna River article a bit and incorporate your lovely subbasin maps. Thanks again, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:27, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for my late arrival into the commenting process, the last few days have been busy. My initial preference was not for the NavFrame, but I think you guys have done a good job with it and it has come together very nicely. I'll leave a longer response later today hopefully, but for now my biggest concern is the diminishing text size for tributaries, sub-tribs, etc. Specifically, the 75% text I think is too small and proves difficult to read. I think the size has to be increased, or another method of distinguishing the hierarchy of the tributaries needs to be worked out. Now that I've started commenting, I think I'm gonna keep going. The link at the bottom for the "bridges" should be changed to "crossings," and the label "States" only applies to the the first 3 links, there should be a clearly break between New York and Counties. Thats it for now. VerruckteDan 18:17, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Dan, I think part of the problem is that navframe text is 90% of normal to start with. When I was using {{nowrap}}, span inside nowrap broke it (no text showed up) and if I tried just font tags, then no matter what size I specified (or none) the text was bigger (perhaps 100%?). I guess I could use font tags inside nowrap for the tribs (largest), subtribs would be regular (90%) and then I could use the current 90% (now for tribs) for subsubtribs. I have another idea, but need to try it first.

We could also try parenthses or italics for subtribs. I think it may be best to provide some sort of key in any case - at bottom below the states, crossings, etc? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:06, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

d) What to abbreviate?

Currently Creek is Cr., River is R., and Branch is Br. I did not abbreviate Run or Fork or (usually) North, South, East or West. Little shows up often, but is not abbreviated. Any ideas here?

I think what you have is fine.Kmusser 19:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

As do I. Dincher 20:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:36, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

e) Miscellaneous questions

Should a map be included in the navbox? How about the counties in the watershed(s)? What about the descriptions of the subbasins of the Susquehanna itself in the navframe, Lower, Middle, Upper (3)? Any other ideas or comments?

Ideally yes, although I'm not sure where it would fit graphically - it would be nice to show where the sub-basins are visually. I can replicate the SRBC sub-basin map with free data for you if you want. If you are able to include a map the parenthetical descriptions of Lower, Middle, and Upper would probably be unnecessary. Kmusser 19:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I visualize a map with the county lines and the basins and subbasins in different shades of the same basic color. Perhaps the same color currently used in the PA map seen on the List of Pennsylvania state parks. Dincher 20:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Dots and smaller text looks alot better. Dincher 01:26, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I took a shot at making some maps that would go with this:

Kmusser 14:11, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for the maps - they look great even tiny. It is possible to put columns in a navframe, so I think we could put images in there that way (image in one column, info in the other). Glad you like dots and smaller text. I will check for size, eliminate non-notable streams, and convert. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

---

Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Changes to NavFrame

• Note change to List of state parks. Changed to "List of state parks in the Susquehanna River basin." This is an idea. Could be a very long list. I'll have to look at a map. Dincher 21:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
• I also started the list of municipalities. Dincher 01:27, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks Dinch, I was going to just list municiplaities which directly border the river or one of the subbasin rivers. We can scrap the state park idea - not sure what it brings to list the 60 plus (guess) PA parks in the Susquehanna watershed. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:24, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
• Agreed with the state parks. I am bsiacally just eyeballing the cities and boroughs etc., using the topozone links at the given wiki sites. I will work more on this soon. Dincher 01:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Lower Susquehanna checklist

I looked first at all the creeks shown on the SRBC map. Then I looked up the area of the drainage basin for the ones on the list, but not on the map. Then I got smart and looked at my beloved "Pennsylvania Gazetteer of Streams II" which lists all streams larger than 25 square miles by drainage basin and found some to add in. In future I will start there. Anyway....

• Out (9 total, not on map and too small): Broad Creek (Susquehanna River) 13.96 sq mi, West Branch Codorus Creek 23.8 sq mi, Paxton Creek 27.4 sq mi, Big Spring Creek 12.90 sq mi, Fishing Creek (Susquehanna River) 18.1 sq mi, Stony Creek (Pennsylvania) 35.6 sq mi, Armstrong Creek 32.3 sq mi, Deep Creek (Pennsylvania) 31.8 sq mi, Little Mahantango Creek 15.1 sq mi.

• Unsure (2 total): Conowingo Creek only 34.4 sq mi, so close to 38.6 sq mi (100 sq km), not on map, but namesake of the massive Conowingo Dam, so I am inclined to keep; Hammer Creek Connestoga River trib on SRBC map, but only 35.2 sq mi (inclined to add)

• Keep (8 total, not on map, but large enough): Little Conestoga Creek 65.5 mi, Little Chiques Creek 44.5 sq mi, Conewago Creek (east) 52.5 sq mi, Quittapahilla Creek 77.3 sq mi, Powell Creek 39.7 sq mi (larger than 100 sq km), Pine Creek (Penns Creek) 93.8 sq mi, Elk Creek (Penns Creek) 57 sq mi, Sinking Creek (Pennsylvania) 58.8 sq mi.

• Add (1 total, on map, not on list): Little Conewago Creek (western one) 65.4 sq mi

• Add (10 total, large enough but not on map or list): West Branch Octararo Creek 48.1 sq mi, East Branch Octararo Creek 90.6 sq mi, North Branch Muddy Creek (Susquehanna River) 43.8 sq mi, Muddy Creek (Conestoga River) 51.8 sq mi, East Branch Codorus Creek 44.5 sq mi (a subsubtrib as a trib of S Br Codorus Cr), South Branch Conewago Creek (west) 73.5 sq mi, Mountain Creek 47.6 sq mi (Yellow Breeches trib), Middle Spring Creek 45.8 sq mi (Conodoguinet trib), Muddy Run (Conodoguinet Creek) 43.3 sq mi, and West Branch Mahantango Creek 46.9 sq mi.

Assuming we keep Conowingo and add Hammer, that is a net increase of 3 (9 out, 12 new in). I am going to call it a night and add them tomorrow. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

To give you another data source I took a look at the USGS rivers map I used when organizing List of Pennsylvania rivers.

The following rivers are on that map: Broad Creek (Susquehanna River), East Branch Octararo Creek, West Branch Octararo Creek, East Branch Codorus Creek, South Branch Codorus Creek, West Branch Codorus Creek, Conewago Creek (east), Stony Creek (Pennsylvania), Powell Creek, Pine Creek (Penns Creek), Elk Creek (Penns Creek)

The following rivers are not: Conowingo Creek, North Branch Muddy Creek (Susquehanna River), Hammer Creek, Little Conestoga Creek, Muddy Creek (Conestoga River), Little Chiques Creek, Quittapahilla Creek, Little Conewago Creek, South Branch Conewago Creek (west), Mountain Creek, Paxton Creek, Big Spring Creek, Middle Spring Creek, Muddy Run (Conodoguinet Creek), Fishing Creek (Susquehanna River), Armstrong Creek, Deep Creek (Pennsylvania), Little Mahantango Creek, West Branch Mahantango Creek, Pine Creek (Mahantango Creek), Sinking Creek (Pennsylvania)

Make of it what you will. Kmusser 15:33, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Perhaps the easiest thing is just to pick a drainage basin size and stick with it. 100 sq km is a nice round number and is about the same size as 40 sq mi, so I picked that. 50 sq mi is nearly 130 sq km and would also work, though it would exclude two of the keeps and seven of the adds.

It also occurs to me that various (N S E W) branches are usually in the same article as the parent stream. The Codorus Creek branches already in the navframe are part of the Codorus Cr. article and all the ones I propose adding are redlinks now. Perhaps it would be easier not to add branches of the same name to the navframe (anyone interested can see them from the parent article, which will be in the navframe). "X Creek" and "Little X Creek" seem much more likely to be separate articles, 2 of 3 listed here are separate.

If I stick with 100 sq km and add Littles but not Branches, that would drop 9 and add 5. Hammer Creek would be out, but I am still inclined to keep Conowingo Creek in (the name is notable). That would be a net loss of 3 streams from the current template. I will mull this over some more before acting, thanks again, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I went with streams only 100 sq km and larger (Conowingo is out), put the Branches in linked with the main stream, and add non-breaking spaces. I am moving on to Juniata River basin, thanks Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:58, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I think you could take out the branches entirely where they don't have their own article . Kmusser 15:13, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I removed three Branches in the Lower Susquehanna (North Br of Muddy Creek (Susquehann R), South Br of Conewago Creek (W), and West Br of Mahnatango Creek), but none in the Juniata R subbasin. I also made all the subtribs and subsubtribs 95% (still obviously smaller on my display) and used () for subsubtribs, plus added this key into the Navframe header for clarity. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:49, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Juniata checklist

Dropped Sinking Run 29.1 sq mi, Snare Run (less than 25 sq mi), Shaffer Creek 36.6 sq mi, Shaffer Cr (under 25 sq mi) and Brush Creek (trib of Brush Creek, under 25 sq mi) Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:27, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

West Branch checklist

Dropped Kings Creek (less than 25 sq mi), Rauchtown Run (treated as one with Antes Creek), Cedar Run (Pine Creek) 37.7 sq mi, Stony Fork Cr (Babb Cr) 37.7 sq mi too, Slab Cabin Run (less than 25 sq mi), Cooks Run 25.6 sq mi, Laurel Run (Sinnemahoning) 37.9 sq mi, Gazam Run less than 25 sq mi.

Add Little Fishing Cr 42.1 sq mi, Marsh Creek (Bald Eagle Cr) 44.6 sq mi, Trout Run (Moshannon Cr) 41.8 sq mi, Beaverdam Run (Clearfield Cr) 49.1 sq mi.

Sinnemahoning branches with larger than 100 sq km drainage basin:

• Sinnemahoning Cr 1035 sq mi
  • First Fork SC 267 sq mi
    • East Fork SC 54.7 sq mi
  • Bennett Branch SC 365 sq mi
    • Driftwood Branch SC 319 sq mi
      • Sinnemahoning Portage Cr 73.2 sq mi
      • West Cr 62.3 sq mi
    • Trout Run 55.1 sq mi

Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Middle Susquehanna checklist

Add Little Wapwallopen Creek sq mi, Spring Brook 57.2 sq mi, Roaring Brook 56.3 sq mi, and Nine Partners Creek 38.6 sq mi. Remove Stony Brook less than 25 sq mi. Add White Creek 42.8 sq mi, Tuscarora Creek 38.9 sq mi, and Sugar Creek 189 sq mi.

Five branches to add if they get articles: S Br Tunkhannock Cr 98.3 sq mi, E Br Tunkhannock Cr 69.1 sq mi, N Br Mehoopany Cr 123 sq mi, W Br Wyalusing Cr 46.6 sq mi, E Br Wyalusing Cr 69.9 sq mi. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:50, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Chemung checklist

I fixed the order, and added Bennetts Creek 95 sq mi, Bentley Creek 58 sq mi, Campbell Creek 39 sq mi, Canacadea Creek 58 sq mi, Fivemile Creek 69 sq mi, Baldwin Creek 41 sq mi (under Goldsmith Creek in Chesapeake Bay website, but USGS map shows Goldsmith is trib of Baldwin), Newtown Creek 81 sq mi, and South Creek 46 sq mi. Areas are from PA Gazetteer of Streams II and Chesapeake Bay Program website for Chemung subbasin here. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Upper Susquehanna checklist

I removed Shadigee Creek 18.9 sq mi, and added Pipe Creek 73 sq mi, Canasawacta Creek 62 sq mi, and Kelsey Brook 42 sq mi.

I used the same sources as for Chemung R. above, but was unsure about the Sangerfield River (on SRBC map, couldn't find basin area). Any help appreciate here.

Chesapeake Bay website listed "Center Brook & Talette Creek" at 45 sq mi (Unadilla R tribs) but the USGS maps show these are separate streams with adjoining watersheds, so I did not include them. Similarly Masonville Creek is listed as 40 sq mi, but much of that is Bennetsville Creek watershed. In both cases the basin areas when split have to be under the threshhold.

I also moved the info from the bottom bar up top to both save a little space and emphasize its importance. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)