Talk:White Deer Hole Creek

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleWhite Deer Hole Creek is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 13, 2009.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 3, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
December 10, 2006Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Untitled[edit]

Any and all feedback appreciated. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 03:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FA Comments[edit]

Just from one editor to another, congratulations on an article largely written by yourself. I'm almost to that level of Wikipedia fluency with my creations, but I still tend to get rocky FA nominations up to a certain point. --Zeality 05:49, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Questions on "Name" section[edit]

Note: I have copied the relevant parts of this discussion from the talk pages for myself and MacGyverMagic. Ruhrfisch 17:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"In 1787, Caleb Farley settled on White Deer Hole Creek with his family (including his four year old son John), and built a mill on the creek by 1789."

You usually "settle in" an area. Besides, should you call it by name if Caleb is supposed to be second possible source of the name as suggested in the first paragraph of the section? Also, I can't quite imagine a mill built on a creek. They float like a bunch of rocks :) Could you clarify how this paragraph about Caleb links to the previous one?

Also, perhaps you should say "two etymologies have been suggested" instead of "are given". - Mgm|(talk) 11:08, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input. I will change it to "two etymologies have been suggested" and agree that you "settle in" an area.
Perhaps it is an older (archaic?) usage, but people can also "settle on" various bodies of water (in the sense that they settle on the banks of the creek, river, on the shore of a bay, etc.). Meginness (published in 1892 and one reference for the Farley story) uses "settled on White Deer Creek" and a search on Google with "settled on" in quotes and "creek" found many instances of this usage. The same is true for a "mill on a creek" (and one could argue that a water powered mill is at least partly in / on the water itself, though definitely not floating as you pointed out). See also the title of George Eliot's novel The Mill on the Floss (where the Floss is a fictional river). Since it can be confusing, I will change the sentence in question to "settled on the banks of White Deer Hole Creek". I prefer to keep "built a mill on the creek" as that seems to be the preferred usage (and saying "on the banks of" twice would be awkward).
As for the relation between the two paragraphs, they are two different sources that give two different reasons for the name. My interpretation of WP:NOR is that I am not supposed to make a connection between them in the article, unless it is verifiable elsewhere (and it is not that I have found - Donehoo does not mention Meginness, and Meginness does not mention the Lenape name). What I tried to make clear by citing Donehoo's map names is that the earliest map name (1755) is the slightly garbled Lenape words for White Deer Hole Creek. A more corrupted version and its translation are on a slightly later map (1759), and by 1770 "White Deer hole" is the name on maps for good. The land was only opened to non-Native American settlers in 1768 (Treaty of Fort Stanwix) and the earliest settlers are 1769 or 1770, about the same time as the map with the modern name. We don't know a lot about the first settlers as they were all chased out and their homes burnt (and some killed) in the Big Runaway of 1778 and again in the Little Runaway of 1779. The Farley family arrives in 1787, 17 or 18 years after the first settlers, 32 years after the first mention of the Lenape name.
84 or so years later, John Farley talked about his life and related the story of someone killing a white deer near the hole where his father Caleb built the mill. The full quoatation is: "I was four years old when my father came here in 1787. We had plenty of red deer at that time. They could be seen every day when we stepped out of our cabins and went along through the valley or over the mountains. I never saw any white deer here, but a white deer is said to have been killed at an early day in a low hole or pond of water that once existed where my father built his mill, and that was the only white deer ever known in this valley." I think it is worth noting that Farley does not say who killed the deer - it could be a settler or a Native American (so could he perhaps be referring to a Lenape tradition passed down through the previous settlers?).
Sorry to be so long winded. I will make the changes and also put this on the article's talk page. Please ask if there are more questions you have. Thanks again, Ruhrfisch 17:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Settled on" may be proper usage, but for me (non-American) it was confusing so I pointed it out. The connection between the two etymologies should be purely grammatical. You say there's two of them, but you didn't actually state that the story about Caleb is the second one. - Mgm|(talk) 21:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies. Having worked on the article so long I tend to get a bit myopic - thanks very much for pointing out my failure to make the relation of Farley's story to the name clear (especially when I didn't get it the first time you told me). I have edited the section in question and hope it is clearer and more understandable. If it is any consolation, my spouse (who is a native speaker of English) did not know the usage "settled on a creek" when I asked. Thanks again, Ruhrfisch 22:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

My edits, and some questions[edit]

As I said at FAC, this article is there. But that doesn't mean it can't be improved.

I printed it out and went through it with a red pen. I just got finished implementing my improvements, and here's a brief summary of the general things I did. Mainly these are things to keep in mind for future fascinating articles about minor tributaries of the Susquehanna.

  • Second references: There were a number of times where the same long proper noun ("Tiadaghton State Forest", "Pennsylvania Route 44") was repeatedly and unnecessarily reused. I get the feeling you worked on different sections at a time ... when you do that, before submitting it to PR, GA or FA, it's a good idea to look the whole thing over and see how it plays as a whole. Fortunately there was no repeated information, just terms. Which says a lot for the editor.
  • Wikification: The article now has links to narrow gauge, fish stocks, the whitewater classification system, and "U.S. state", to help better explain those terms when they come up. In many cases they helped tighten up the prose, too ("stocked with trout for fishing" was a little redundant IMO).
  • Proper metric measures. I changed the liters in the sewer plant discharge to cubic meters, which I believe is preferred in that context. Also, I know it's officially considered deprecated but I personally use hectares for land areas less than one square km.
  • "Class A Wild Trout Waters": This is used often enough but the explanation/definition doesn't come until about the third reference. So I moved the definition and reference into the intro.
  • Some general prose awkwardness: "In winter, trails may be used for cross-country skiing and there are dedicated cross-country and snowmobile trails." That sentence says the same thing twice. It reads like some helpful anon dropped in and wanted to say something but couldn't figure out where to put it. So I streamlined it.
  • DMS coordinates in the main text. Absolutely no excuse for that where it's not absolutely necessary. Especially when we have the {{geolinks-US-river}} template for that sort of thing. So I put them and it together under external links.

Now, to two things that I couldn't address:

  • Images: The article isn't lacking for images, and the ones in it are superb ... they make this hiker want to go check it out. But a) if the Mid State Trail allows you to hike up the headwaters beyond the source, would a picture of the source be possible to get with some bushwhacking? I think all our river and stream articles should have a picture of the source if possible (I would also suggest waiting for warmer weather to get some consistency in the pictures. Which, of course, means that in PA you're likely to be getting chewed up by thorn bushes if a significant amount of off-trail is involved. But such are the demands of our wikimuse).

    Also, the article discusses all those leftover bunkers in the last grafs. It's a little dry imagewise there ... it seems like it would be very easy if there are so many to go take a picture of one.

  • Discharge: There's no figure on the creek's discharge. If I didn't know the realities of streamflow measurement, I'd consider that an FA dealbreaker. But I do, and it wouldn't surprise me — well, actually it does given how that stream looks at its mouth — that the USGS hasn't set up a streamflow gauge station at least there. Have there been any attempts over the years to estimate the creek's discharge? If not, at least put something in the infobox explaining that this data point is unmeasured.

Once again, great article that does so many things right (You deserve especial praise, and perhaps a barnstar, for producing an FA with no redlinks whatsoever. Given the local peculiarity of some of the linked articles, that's no mean feat). Daniel Case 20:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    • Thanks very much for your hard work and copyedits. I have a picture of a bunker. I can try to get a photo of the source in the spring. I have never seen any discharge figures and there is no USGS gauge (or even a County flood warning gauge) on the creek. Very briefly I am fine with all but one two of the edits. 1) The archeology was done prior to construction (it was a 6+ acre farm field before it was a sewage treatment plant). 2) There are two kinds of trails - those that are multi use, and those that are dedicated to just snowmobiling or xc skiing. I would like to discuss these more, but I need to respond to an Oppose on the FAC first. Ruhrfisch 04:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I do work on sections and I wrote many of the more obscure articles to get rid of redlinks (Pennsylvania Route 44, PA 554, Union County Industrial Railroad, the prison, all the Native American path articles - Sheshequin Path got a DYK). I thought over the trails sentence and am OK with it as revised. I very much prefer "farms (many Amish)" to "farms (primarily Amish)" because even if the Amish have doubled in numbers since 1995, they are still less than half the population. I will add the bunker picture next. Ruhrfisch 04:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changes after FA[edit]

After a lot of looking and prompted by Daniel Case's question, I found and added discharge data, as well as two more references on discharge. Ruhrfisch 22:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minor Problem with Name section[edit]

The article says that "John's father Caleb built a mill on the creek by 1789." John's father was, however, actually names John Farley (this older John is one of my ancestors). The source that is given for the information (http://www.usgennet.org/usa/pa/county/lycoming/history/Chapter-39.html) actually agrees with this (it indicates that John's father was John, and that John built the mill).

Also, see ftp://ftp.rootsweb.com/pub/usgenweb/pa/lycoming/history/local/whitedeer.txt, which is a transcription of an article appearing in the "Lycoming Gazette and West Branch Bulletin" in 1870. It contains part of an interview with John Farley (which is what is alluded to in the other source). John says that he "came here into this valley with my father, John Farley, in 1787."

Caleb Farley was a brother of the older John, and actually did come to White Deer Hole Valley (either with John or a few years later). KarlderGroße (talk) 03:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for pointing that out, the Meginness chapter is not as clear as the newspaper transcript, sorry for the error. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:21, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Minor math problem[edit]

The first sentence of the "Watershed" section says, "The White Deer Hole Creek watershed is in Clinton (0.08%), Lycoming (4.40%), and Union (3.67%) counties." Shouldn't they add up to 100 percent? Finetooth (talk) 22:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see what must be the correct figures slightly further down (in the third paragraph of the same section). Finetooth (talk) 22:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have struggled with how to clearly present this information - what is meant is that the White Deer Hole Creek watershed that is in Clinton County is 0.08% of Clinton County, 4.40% of Lycoming Co. is in it, and 3.67% of all of Union County is in it. If you have an idea for how to express this more clearly, I would like to hear it. Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How about "The White Deer Hole Creek watershed consists of 0.08 percent of the surface of Clinton County, 4.40 percent of the surface of Lycoming County, and 3.67 percent of the surface of Union County"? Finetooth (talk) 04:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I like the idea, but would you be OK with "surface area" or even just "area" instead of just "surface"? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:39, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. Either would be fine. Perhaps plain "area" is best. This brings a peculiar thought to mind. In a place with a great deal of vertical relief, the actual surface would be much bigger than the land's length times its width. I wonder if topographers have a name for that other measurement, a land's surface as opposed to its simple geometric area? Finetooth (talk) 04:51, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will change it just plain area, thanks. My guess is that there are several specialist terms (although I don't know them). Rivers have River miles (distance from where a tributary enters the main stem to the mouth of the main stem) for example. They also have relief ratio and meander ratio (see meander). Ruhrfisch ><>°° 10:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Map[edit]

I found this creek on Reading Howell's 1792 Map Of The State Of Pennsylvania. Would it be worth mentioning or linking to this map in the article? According to the host, the images are available under cc-by-sa, so we should even be able to upload them to commons. –Sarregouset (talk) 23:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks - since the map is from 1792 the copyright has long since expired, so I would use {{pd-old}} and give the full source. FYI, I reverted your edit to the article because the unnamed tributaries are entirely in the named features. The chnge made it sound as if they started in them and flowed out. If you look at USGS GNIS the origin of the gap is about where the trib enters the main creek Fourth Gap Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're right about the copyright; I'll work at uploading it. And thanks for mentioning your revert, as I was going to question you. Perhaps I didn't use the best wording, but that sentence really confused me. Would 'flow through' be more suitable than 'originate'? Also, that was not the only change I made, as I noted in my edit summary. The list of animal names at the end of the article alternates between singular and plural forms, and it seems 'squirrel' (and 'hawk', I just noticed) should be capitalized for consistency. –Sarregouset (talk) 00:20, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I use popups and previewed the changes you made but did not look at it as a full diff. In the process I only saw the first part and missed all of your later plural edits, sorry. I am fine with flow through. Although this article is FA, updating parts of it is on my short term list of things to do - there was a CCC camp west of Elimsport that built many of the forest roads and paths in the watershed (need to add this and the ref), I need to update the Infobox to a Geobox, and I was going to be consistent about species names being capitalized but other plant and animal names not being capitalized (so White-tailed deer but trout). Please feel free to tweak the description of the gap tribs and pluralize names. Sorry for the confusion, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I figured that's what happened, but I'm glad we resolved it. I put my changes back; right now all the names are capitalized, but you're right non-species names could be lowercase if it's consistent. By the way, I'm having trouble uploading the map, as it's 160 MB right now, so it won't be up tonight. I'll have to crop to the area we're interested in. –Sarregouset (talk) 01:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Hopefully I can do my cleanups in the next week or less. Yes please upload the map or a section of it, Commons has a size limit of 20 MB, IIRC. The article already mentions Scull's map and a few others (in Donehoo's book) in the Name section. I like the map - could it be an External link and in Commons? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:37, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Review[edit]

Finetooth comments: I tried to be thorough and treated this article pretty much the same as one coming to Peer Review. Excellent article, wonderful photos. I believe it taught me a new trick or two to apply to Tryon Creek, which is far less than half-baked at the moment.

Lead

  • "White Deer Hole Creek is a 20.5-mile (33.0 km) long tributary" - I'm not sure "long" is needed.
  • Not everyone agrees, but linking U.S. state might be unnecessary.
  • "the creek and its 67.2 square miles (174.0 km2) watershed" - Needs a hyphen.
  • "with 28.4% of the watershed given to agriculture and 71.6% covered by forest..." - WP:MOS#Percentages leans toward spelling out "percent" in the main text. Exceptions exist for scientific and technical articles, tables, infoboxes, and complex listings such as, I imagine, the demographics stats in city articles.
  • "The western part of White Deer Hole Creek has very high water quality and is the only major creek in Lycoming County classified as "Class A Wild Trout Waters"... " - Since only the western part is Class A, I'd insert a word like "section" after "the only major creek".
  • "A logging railroad ran along the creek from 1901 to 1904 for timber clearcutting and small-scale lumbering continues." - This needs a comma between "clearcutting" and "and".
  • "During World War II a TNT plant was built in the watershed, which became a federal prison in 1952." - Two things. I'd be inclined to spell out trinitrotoluene before the abbreviation. Also, the watershed didn't become a federal prison, so I'd re-cast, probably as "During World War II, a trinitrotoluene (TNT) plant, which became a federal prison in 1952, was built in the watershed."
  • "Most development is in the eastern end of the valley, with two unincorporated villages, the hamlet, and most of the farms (many Amish)." - This seems to be the first mention of a hamlet. What hamlet?
    • Thanks, I have fixed all of these except for the linked U.S. state (if someone else delinks it I won't revert). I just changed "the hamlet" to "a hamlet" (it is Spring Gardens, the world famous metropolis). Ruhrfisch ><>°° 19:42, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Name

  • "The 'hole' was 'a large circular basin of low ground of some ten acres [(four ha)] in extent....after my father's mill and dam were built the water of the dam overflowed and covered the most of the hollow basin of ground." - I'm wondering if the "a" on after should be a capital A since the quote seems to be composed to two separate sentences connected by the ellipsis. If it's a capital A, the ellipsis needs a space between it and the A.
    • I am not sure why I put "hole" in quotes - I removed them. Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:10, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Course

  • "U.S. Route 15 and the Union County Industrial Railroad run north-south here along the river and cross the creek just before its mouth (however, this track is not in service as of 2009)." - Rather than using parentheses to surround a complete sentence within a complete sentence, I might suggest a semi-colon: "U.S. Route 15 and the Union County Industrial Railroad run north-south here along the river and cross the creek just before its mouth; however, this track is not in service as of 2009."
  • "Its course meanders more the further east it flows." - The course doesn't flow. Perhaps something like "The meanders are more pronounced along the downstream reaches" or "The meandering increases near the mouth" would be better.
  • "For its entire length, White Deer Hole Creek runs along the north side of South White Deer Ridge, (an east-west ridge of the Appalachian Mountains)." - I'm not sure the parentheses serve any function. Suggestion: "For its entire length, White Deer Hole Creek runs along the north side of South White Deer Ridge, an east-west ridge of the Appalachian Mountains."
  • "There are 24 unnamed tributaries on the south side of the creek, all flowing down the side of South White Deer Ridge, while there are only eleven tributaries on the north side, including Spring Creek." - Eleven should be 11 for consistency.
    • I used to be afraid of semicolons and in love with parenthesis, what can I say? (All fixed; thanks) ;-) Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:10, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Geology

  • "and the highest yearly peak gauge height was 11.83 feet (3.61 m), both on June 22, 1972 during Hurricane Agnes" - Comma needed after 1972.

Watershed

  • "In 1995 there were over 200 Amish in more than twenty families (in comparison, Washington Township's population was 1,613 in 2000)" - For consistency, twenty should be 20. Also, the complete sentence in parentheses would technically be better standing alone in some fashion. One way would be this: "In 1995 there were over 200 Amish in more than 20 families. In comparison, Washington Township's population was 1,613 in 2000."

Water quality and pollution

  • "Gregg Township had no wastewater treatment plant until an 800,000 gallons/day (304 m³/day) plant was built... " - Needs a hyphen.
  • "The drainage basin has been designated by Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection... " - Should "the" be inserted before "Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection"?
  • "and 13 for the 3.0 mile (4.8 km) long unnamed tributary in the Fourth Gap" - Needs a hyphen and probably doesn't need "long".

Recreation

  • Should DCNR be spelled out, Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR), as well as linked?
  • "Part of the 261 miles (420 km) Pennsylvania Mid State Trail (solely for hiking with orange blazes)" - Needs a hyphen, and I'd suggest re-casting, perhaps like this: "Part of the 261-mile (420 km) Pennsylvania Mid State Trail, marked with orange blazes to indicate it is solely for hiking, runs along... ". Otherwise, it paints a picture of someone hiking with orange blazes.
  • "(with red blazes)" - What is the meaning of the red blazes?
    • changed to "... , marked with red blazes, ...", other problems fixed too - thanks Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:43, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lycoming County boundaries

  • I don't think White Deer Hole creek should be bolded. MOS:BOLD suggests using italics for emphasis rather than bold in most situations.

Early inhabitants

  • "White Deer Hole Creek was acquired by the colonial government of Pennsylvania on November 5, 1768" - Comma needed after 1768.
  • "Settlers fled feared and actual attacks by the British and their allies." - The "fled feared" combination stopped me. Maybe "fled from" would solve the problem.
  • "The first grist mill was built on the creek in 1789, with four more built in 1798, 1815, 1817, and 1842." - "With" has been creeping into the language as a kind of connector that is deprecated. Better might be "The first grist mill was built on the creek in 1789, and four more were built in 1798, 1815, 1817, and 1842."
    • I made it "fled from feared", all other fixed too, thanks Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:43, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lumber and Logging Railroad

  • Lower-case "logging" and "railroad" in the section head.
  • "run by the Vincent Lumber Company from 1901 to 1904. They built... " - A company is an "it" rather than a "they". Perhaps, since "it" sounds a bit strange, "The company built... " would work.
  • "The lumber railroad ran parallel to the creek, with the end of the track near the Fourth Gap." - Another "with" connector that is technically ungrammatical. Perhaps "The lumber railroad, which ended near the Fourth Gap, ran parallel to the creek."
  • "It was incorporated on June 24, 1901" - Comma needed after 1901.
  • "The railroad was torn up, and its one second-hand Shay locomotive was moved to the Vincent Lumber Company operation at Denholm (in Juniata County)." - I don't think you need the parentheses.
  • "It burned down on May 10, 2006 (causing $500,000 in damages) but was expected to be back in operation in a month." - Comma after 2006 and then maybe no parentheses but another comma after "damages". Also, what happened? Did operations resume?
    • All fixed - the Amish sawmill has reopened, but I don't have a great WP:RS for that (I found the school bus schedule - they stop there). I just added "it since has reopened". Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:43, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ordinance plant to federal prison and game lands"

  • "the federal government built the US$50 million... " - The US isn't needed in a US-centric article. Just $50 million is OK.
  • "Many of the 149 concrete bunkers remain,[45] but it is "a diverse mix of mature forest, impoundments, and brushy thickets, as well as a local hotspot for a variety of birds during migration". - Should the direct quote also get a citation? Or should citation 45 be moved to the end of the sentence?
    • It was the Audubon Guide (the next ref, but a few sentences later), so I added it again. Thanks for catching that Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:43, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References

  • Some of the dates are in m-d-y format and some in yyyy-mm-dd format.

I hope this helps. Finetooth (talk) 20:32, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion for additional content[edit]

Hi. I'd like to suggest that this article has a section covering the creek's ecological interest. There is some mention of this scattered across other sections (e.g. it's attractiveness to Trout, and the game species found in the area) but the article would merit a section covering this subject as a whole. SP-KP (talk) 09:28, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - that is a good idea and I will work on it after the article is off the Main Page. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 11:21, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. state[edit]

I removed "the U.S. state of" calling it "gratuitous overlinking". I was reverted with "... restore link to U.S. State. I believe that it needs to be mentioned. not all know where PA is". Now we have a compromise "delink US state, but leave it in as many outside the US are not as familiar with the states".

We certainly don't need to go back to linking U.S. State as it merely qualifies Pennsylvania, which itself is linked (two words after) and (naturally) links to U.S. State, and, more importantly, has next to nothing to do with this article. When I saw sentence complete with the link to U.S. State it immediately struck me as having been twisted for the mere purpose of adding this useless link. It's not uncommon for things on WP to be twisted around links. So I deleted the lot.

Now it's back, unlinked, since many outside are not so familiar with the states & might not know where Pennsylvania is. Fair enough, some of us non-Americans might not know that Pennsylvania is a US state. Are those who don't really that significant a proportion? Can they not just click on Pennsylvania? I'm glad that U.S. State is again unlinked but I still doubt the use in having it there at all. JIMp talk·cont 18:51, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have lived both in and outside of the US. From my experiences outside of the US, there are some people who just aren't that familiar with US states, and I think to provide context to the reader one should identify not just the state/province/territory, but also the country for any article. Since your user page says you speak fluent Strine, I once saw someone confuse something in South Wales with New South Wales (as there was no indication that it was in the UK). I would be OK with White Deer Hole Creek is a 20.5-mile (33.0 km) tributary of the West Branch Susquehanna River in Clinton, Lycoming and Union counties in Pennsylvania in the United States. too. Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 19:23, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think that bit should stay, as it provides context to those who are unfamiliar with U.S. states. I'd prefer it were linked, as well. –Juliancolton | Talk 19:48, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

US state, if mentioned at all, should certainly not be linked (per WP:CONTEXT) since the topics of these articles are so distinct. I'm happy enough with the current compromise but do prefer your suggestion, Ruhrfisch.

White Deer Hole Creek is a 20.5-mile (33.0 km) tributary of the West Branch Susquehanna River in Clinton, Lycoming and Union counties in Pennsylvania in the United States.

Whilst it is good to know which country it's in, the fact that Pennsylvania happens to be a state is off topic. Though, might the above be a little wordy? How about this?

White Deer Hole Creek is a 20.5-mile (33.0 km) tributary of the West Branch Susquehanna River in Clinton, Lycoming and Union counties, Pennsylvania, USA.

JIMp talk·cont 20:55, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My recollection is that the article originally said something like "...in Pennsylvania in the United States." (back in 2006 when US was wikilinked too) and "US state of Pennsylvania" was a way of giving the country (US) with less characters. I need to think about which version I prefer - "Pennsylvania, USA" seems too choppy to me. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:17, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I just checked and the original wording was "...in Pennsylvania in the United States." which was changed to the current version by the time it reached FAC. I am OK with the current version (US state) or with the original version (in the United States), but think "Pennsylvania, USA" sounds odd. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:25, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd argue that readability doesn't simply increase with the reduction of number of characters: i.e. reducing the number of characters is not in itself necessarily a good thing. I wonder whether the underlying motive for the introduction of U.S. state wasn't to work this link in. Anyhow, I'd argue that ... in Pennsylvania in the United States ... is easier to swallow than ... in the US state of Pennsylvania ... (with its little tit-bit of irrelevant trivia tangled in there).

So, ditching the US state bit we've got a few different possible versions. Some perhaps choppy, others perhaps wordy. What if we listed them?

  1. ... in Clinton, Lycoming and Union counties in Pennsylvania in the United States.
  2. ... in Clinton, Lycoming and Union counties in Pennsylvania, USA.
  3. ... in Clinton, Lycoming and Union counties, Pennsylvania, USA.

I'd suggested number 3 but if this is choppy and odd, how about number 2? Is this still choppy or odd? Do you see what I mean when I say number 1 is wordy: count the number if ins in the phrase. JIMp talk·cont 22:34, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for these three options. My preference among these three is #1. The "Pennsylvania, USA" part just sounds odd to me, and in American English. I also really don't have a problem with "in the US State of Pennsylvania" (option zero?) Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay ...

0. ... in Clinton, Lycoming and Union counties in the US State of Pennsylvania.

... well, it does have fewer ins. If "Pennsylvania, USA" sounds odd in American English (I wouldn't know), it's numbers 0 or 1. JIMp talk·cont 07:39, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • My preference is 1, then 0. 2 and especially 3 sound like part of a return address on a package sent overseas - not incorrect, just odd to my ears at least. Hopefully some more people will weigh in here, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 12:16, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on White Deer Hole Creek. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:03, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on White Deer Hole Creek. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:47, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on White Deer Hole Creek. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:27, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FA concerns[edit]

I'm looking at this older featured article as part of WP:URFA/2020, a drive to spur improvements in older featured articles.

  • " In 2009 the name "South Creek" has disappeared, but there is still a "South Creek Road" on the right bank" - something seems to have gone wrong here - the source is a highway map from 2004, so it can't really support something from 2009
    • Updated with 2022 version of the same PennDOT highway map. - Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:21, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "however, this track is not in service as of 2009" - any hope of getting something more current
    • Yes, switched to the updated Union County Industrial Railroad website URL, and added the PennDOT railroad map - both from 2022. - Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:35, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 2000, the White Deer Hole Creek watershed population was 2,672" - again, any hope of an update with numbers from either of the two censuses since then?
    • I asked at the WikiProject on the US Census, and there is data out there for watershed population based on the 2010 census. See here. I need to learn how to use this, or find someone who knows. This has NOT been fixed yet, but it looks promising that it can be updated. - Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:13, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In comparison, Washington Township's population was 1,613 in 2000" - should be able to get new census data for this (I'd just do this myself, but I have always had difficulties trying to navigate the census date portals)
  • "The drainage basin has been designated by Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection as "a high quality watershed" since 2001" - struggling to find an exact equivalence, but this seems suggest White Deer Hole Creek was considered "impaired" for a couple years due to contamination with fecal pathogens (see pp. 12 and 176)
  • "as of 2009 the forests have grown back and are mixed oak, with blueberry and mountain laurel bushes" - content is from 2009, but source is from 2002
    • I changed this to "Despite this small-scale lumbering, the forests have grown back since the clear cutting of the 19th century, and are mixed oak..." (I just got rid of the year reference). I think the important thing is that it is no longer a clear cut wasteland, and much of the watershed is state forest (this has been true for many decades). @Hog Farm: - does this work for you? - Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:36, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This one's not in bad shape, but some updates and a few improvements to the referencing are needed. If improvements don't occur, a featured article review may be necessary, although hopefully that can be avoided. I can help a little bit on this if there's going to be a concerted effort, but I just am not very familiar with where to find sources for this specific topic. Hog Farm Talk 03:53, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • I just saw this, thanks - I will see what I can do. I should have a bit more time with the holidays coming up. - Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:46, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Ruhrfisch: - Thanks for responding! I can try to help a little bit but I'm going to be fairly busy for the forseeable future. Hog Farm Talk 22:14, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the Name and Course sections, and am working on the rest of the article. I found a source for the watershed area covered by forests, urban development, etc. I am still looking for population by watershed. I have found several sources to update the water quality information, but need to figure out how best to present it (I need to make it clearer how different parts of the creek have different water qualities). Any feedback on changes so far is welcome, - Ruhrfisch ><>°° 13:16, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to look back in soon - life has been a bit hectic for me but is finally slowing down for the first time since May. Hog Farm Talk 03:42, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - I've also been quite busy, but should have more time to work on this starting next week. I've tried to reply to individual concerns above. - Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:00, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, hopefully this coming week I can get some more updates made. - Ruhrfisch ><>°° 14:58, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ruhrfisch Hog Farm is quite busy during tax season, so I offered to try to see this one through. I see you haven't been able to edit here since 20 November. When you have time, can you backtrack through HF's list above, and indicate under each item what is done? Once you're through that, pls ping me and I will give it a read-through. All the bst, and I hope you are well, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:49, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
SandyGeorgia, good to hear from you. Sorry, I was waiting to hear from Hog Farm and then got busy IRL. I will indicate what is done and what can be fixed this coming weekend. I am doing well, thanks. Hope you are too, - Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:10, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:White_Deer_Hole_Creek&oldid=1204467201"