Knowledge talk:WikiProject Rivers/Naming

1669:, etc. "Most common" tests would probably be skewed by classicists who recite the name over and over online, while the living breathing people of the area don't have websites of their own, not yet anyway. Ironically, while we say we want to use local names, we only seem to like Latin-1 transcriptions - on the Commons, articles for Russian cities have been moved to their Cyrillic forms, for accuracy, but the category page is now rather daunting! The Turkish "ı" is similarly confusing; even lots of native Turks seem to substitute "i" when writing web pages in English. So we have to be a little wary of the enthusiasm for "nativizing" names; uniformly adding "River" to the name of rivers in a non-English-speaking region is a longstanding practice by English writers, and we could legitimately adopt it as a house style rule. 1573:

these names, let alone assume them. So the motivation to add "River" just isn't there. Conversely, for "Delaware", "Congo", "Orange", the non-river meanings are just as common or more common, so you have to add something. "River" is convenient, because in many areas, "X River" is the official name too. So if you can disambiguate by using a longer official name, great, everybody is happy. In some additional cases, the official name doesn't really correspond to English usage well - for instance, when I hear "Ruhr", I think of what WP calls the

158: 140: 1425:

are 2 rivers with name Chulym and it was better to split the article into 2 separate articles than to rename it (there ia lso a town with name Chulym). And so and so on. Why did you start your renames with a country you don't know enough about? Start with your own one, may be it will help you to understand that it is better to use already created and not so bad rules with which most people agree than claim your own rules without any notification of people who worked in this area before you.

1884:-- or an apropriate synonym -- in it. The reason for this is: (1) for consistency; (2) to help people whose English is somewhat shakey to understand which article they have found; & (3) to avoid further disambiguation problems down the road. Dropping "river" from names like "Nile", "Orinocco", "Danube", etc. may look straightforward right now, but I can see 6 months from now someone coming in & complaining that this style is confusing. -- 2048:

people for whom English is not native language. I did not take part in this discussion because of my only basic level of English and I thought that native speakers see the best solution better but now I decided to add my 2 cents as I see that we have no progress in this discussion. So, I support "X River" with exception of only very well-known rivers, with redirects from plain "X" to these articles if there is no disambigation page.

109: 815:(e.g. Stan not) of the english-natives and those non-english natives that argue it is not really part of the name. I did not change any of "X" to "X River" just for fun. For Sava I did it, because the link let to Sava-disambig page, so I disambiguated. And because I am in favor of having only few ways to name rivers, I did not make it with lowercase, neither with brackets, but with uppercase - trailing. 2022:). Unless there is very strong evidence that "X" is easily recognized by most English-speaking parts of the world as referring to the river with that name, the articles should be at X River or River X. So rivers that are not widely known outside the local area should always be at X River (or River X where warranted). Redirects can handle cases where a less familiar "X" refers only to "X River". 1618:

same thing, like the names of rivers in New Zealand which have English and Maori names. In general we try to use natural disambiguation before we resort to inventing systems for parenthetical disambiguators. So if rivers can be differentiated from towns by simply added the word River to form the natural term, X River, it is the prefered solution to any system like X (river).

967:, that wasn't referred to from the usual pages (lists of rivers, cities etc.). Since there are no other Echternachs as far as I know I moved it to Echternach. I usually check links I make, I hope everybody does that. BTW in what language is Kazan called/spelled Qaxan? You may want to add it to the article, so people can find it by searching, and/or create a redirect. 2601:) even though the discussion has not yet led to a disapproval of "X river". I chose Weser and Wümme because for German rivers there seems to be a consequent choice for "X", unless there's something else more important called X. For Weser and Wümme there isn't, so they should be "X". And Wuemme is wrong, or are we going to rename Düsseldorf to Duesseldorf as well? 2947:"There are 2 Eau Claire Rivers, one is a tributary of the Chippewa, the other is a tributary of the Wisconsin. As it happens, there are Chippewa Rivers in at least Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan and based on Google searches, in Ontario as well (although I haven't been able to find the Ontario one(s) on a map yet). These rivers are, accordingly 1481:. I know there are more Oka's, let's wait with splitting the article until someone writes something substantial about the other ones. Likewise for Pechora and Mezen, if someone writes something interesting about the city we can always disambiguate them like London and Eschweiler. BTW I didn't move Oka River, so what are you talking about? 1577:, and when reminded there's a river in it, I would say "Oh yeah, the Ruhr River". In the US almost every river is named after something else, so to USians it seems pretty normal to pre-disambiguate by adding "River" - and to say it as "River X" if you want to be poetic or pretentious or both. :-) The idea of a river uniquely named just 168: 2946:

I didn't realize there was a Rivers project when I started writing about rivers in Wisconsin. There are, in Wisconsin, 4 "Yellow River"s, several "Black River"s, and even 2 "Eau Claire River"s. What I did was the following, and I'm nowhere near done, so stop me before I get out of hand...I said me,

2057:

Wow, I've been away for only a couple of days, and look what happened with the discussion! I honestly read over it twice, but I still do not see the clear definitions of the proposals. Would someone mind to please compile all of the options into one poll, so everyone could vote? The outcome of the

2013:

to make things more complicated than need be. In general the name should be "X River", unless there is a good reason for using some other form. "River X" is a common form in many areas, and there are some cases where the river is so well known that "X" alone is unambiguously recognizable as referring

1942:

I'm strongly in favour of plain X, if there's nothing else called X, and if X is the most significant object called X. Usually, the first line of a river article is: "X is a river in country Y", so people would have to be really poor English speakers not to understand what type of article they found.

1879:

Actually, what I wrote was not a suggestion; I was simply attempting to figure out what we are talking about -- although I may have slanted what I thought was the consensus with my own opinion. And one point I want to strongly advocate for is that the title of the article should keep some form of the

1617:

What proposal are you refering to exactly? The word river is always capitalized when it is used as part of a name, whether it comes before or after the name. Usually we use the modern name of things, not the ancient. The real problem arises when different groups currently have different names for the

1453:

Yes, you are right - he has such rights. We all have equal rights in Knowledge but not equal knowledge about this or that subject. If I don't know enough about rivers in Indonesia I do not start mass renaming of them. To your question why I did not add a disambig about Ob river or Chulim river or Oka

1362:

You are not supposed to undertake major renaming projects single-handedly without discussing with other editors. there is a reason in your logic, but it is also quite possible you are missing some objections, e.g., naming uniformity, etc. I strongly urge you to talk at the pages I mentioned, at least

1085:

usage (thus Milan not Milano), with common local usage as a fallback. In a non-English-speaking area, "River X" vs "X River" is unlikely to be an issue, because "river" is an English word and would not be a local usage at all. Exceptions might be if a government published official English orthography

535:, IMO it is up to them to decide whether they would like to standardise to any of valid naming conventions. Also, I don't quite understand when "River" is part of the name. IMO it is like saying "Mister" is part of the name of Mr. Smith. May be my English knowledge is poor... 01:32, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC) 2660:

Yes we can but you will find theee encyclopedia article under Atlantic Ocean. We can call people by their first name or their last name only but we wouldn't include them in the phone book that way. The British may call people by their aristocratic title alone but in this encyclopedia we list them by

2327:

I agree that the Moselle river article is not consequent in its usage of "river". I prefer Ruhrjung's first example because it is obvious from the context that the Rhine, Meurthe, Sauer, Ruwer and Saar are rivers. Moselle, Meurthe, Ruwer and Saar are "X River" articles because there are other things

1950:

I agree with Markus! I've always found all these "River" in the titles somewhat silly. I also don't understand what need for disambiguation there is. If, for instance, it turns out that there exists a lesser known village or lake or something that in English is known under exactly the same name, why

1929:

But to respond to what I assume is your point, this is one of the cases I feel that "river" -- with a lower case r -- should be used. Otherwise, do we want to get into endless arguments over what is meant by "famous"? Is the Columbia river famous enough to be known only by "Columbia"? What about the

1445:

now this, then fix his mistake and write a disambig, thus also preventing mistakes by other wikipedians. If not disambig, then make at least a note on the page. Was Ob City mentioned anywhere? Knowledge has to be usefull for everyone, russian river articles are not supposed to be read only by people

1166:

I think the current version is clear. And the new proposal is wrong. "X" alone is not the recommended first choice. "River X" or "X River" is. "X River" is not prefered to "River X". In some cases of rivers in non-English-speaking areas, the most common English name might still be "River X". We just

2988:

I should probably also note my idea about "Fork"s, since I don't see that discussed anywhere. A number of rivers in the US and possibly elsewhere, are named "North Fork" or whatever of some other river's name. I had originally thought to make each fork a separate river article, but since then I'm

2868:

Umlaut-less Zurich is the "English translation" just as "Munich" is the translation of "München". If things have a standard translation, we use it, otherwise we refrain from making up our own. My EB on DVD does go outside 8859, and en: will be able to do so also when the Unicode conversion happens.

2047:

but for not wide-known rivers it is much better to have this suffix all the time. It gives for writers a possibility to set up links without worrying about exact names of referred articles (note that they may be not created yet). I think that system is very convinient especially for writers and for

970:

My opinion about upper or lower case: upper case suggests that River is part of the name, which may be so for USA, UK, Australia etc., but not for Germany, France, Russia etc. Suggestion: get rid of brackets for rivers, but make it lower case river if it's not part of the name, but required because

1629:

Nevermind my comment; I had glanced at the section "Multiple rivers with the same name", & thought it was identical to what I proposed a long time ago, & was rejected because it was too cumbersome. Looking at the page history, I see that my original proposal is not what is currently on the

1600:

Obviously local or common usage should be preferred: Rio Grande, not Rio Grande River; River Thames, not Thames River (when speaking of the one in Britain). Yet what do we do about rivers in Anatolia or Turkey, which are known by both their Ancient name & their modern Turkish name? I ask this

1572:

River naming is a bit like town/city naming, in that we have a mix of expectations, meaning that it is unlikely that a single rule will be entirely satisfactory. Some names are clearly unambiguous by themselves, "Rhine", "Nile", "Danube", for instance. Few people even know of non-river things with

1424:

I also disagree with your idea of massive renaming rivers articles. If you don't know enough about countries to which these rivers belong then it is not the best idea to start your work with changing the rules. For example you renamed Ob River to Ob - but there is also Ob town on this river. There

2356:

WP's own articles are probably not a good guide, since they are often written by non-native speakers. I was looking at my Baedeker for Switzerland, but random sampling found "River X", "X River", and "X" all within the space of a few pages, hmmm. On "Saar", I think of "Saarland" as a governmental

1976:

The naming of rivers in English is so uncontroversial that I can't believe we're having this discussion. Almost all rivers have the word "river" as part of their name in English. There are exceptions (the Nile, for example), but they are indeed exceptions. Maybe the naming scheme is silly, but

1859:

I disagree with any proposal that tries to make just X the standard. In common usage, we only use plain X for very famous rivers like the Rhine or the Danube. I don't like just X because it will inevitable lead to disambiguation problems that are easily avoided using the common forms River X or X

1550:

It should also be taken into consideration that the new way is quite a nuisance to editors. Imagine writing an article that mentions rivers—with your system in place one would actually have to check all names to make sure the links go to the actual articles, and not to the disambiguation pages.

1376:

I agree with Mikkalai here. Be you right or wrong, the change is too massive without at least trying to discuss it first. Plus, did you think about the number diasmbiguities this would create? There are plenty of places that have the same names as rivers; having the word "River" in the river's

661:

Hey, please answer this question - why is this never recommended, and does that mean that it must really be in uppercase all the time? Tobias Conradi is on a spree of changing all such references to non-English rivers into uppercases, and it will be a lot of work to revert him if more time passes

399:

if "River" is not part of the name this might sometimes be the way someone writes about it in an article. He would probably not use "X (river)" and maybe dislikes "X River", because the latter suggests at least to some people that River is part of the translated name. English natives might have a

1488:

I just tried to prevent not necessary movements back and force. I also think that it is better to discuss proper things in proper place. But you started these renaming without any discussions. As for me it would be more convinirnt if we always have articles about rivers with suffix "River" and a

2669:

The difference is that "Atlantic" is an adjective to "Ocean" (correct me if I'm wrong), and cannot be a complete name as such. Atlantic may be an ambiguous case, but you can't say "I crossed the Indian" (instead of ... Ocean) or ".. the North" (instead of ... Sea). You can see the difference in

2081:

I figured as much, but it'd still be nice if those arguing for the status quo made their intentions more clear. As for the "X river", I realize it is not proper capitalization, and this is one of the reasons I oppose it. I am "weakly" opposed, because, as it had been mentioned earlier, the "X

842:

The Sava page was already disambiguated, you just changed " (river)" to " River" in the title and in the links pointing to it. But anyway, I don't think it's a good idea to interfere in this discussion by doing this while the English speakers have not made up their mind. Let them have a poll or

800:

But is it really? I see it as just a descriptive word, a common thing but not a prescribed word. The river Sava for example can be called "Sava River" and "River Sava", neither is really better, or at least I can't see why it would be. And since it's not native to English, it can be called just

691:

My watchlist has recorded you going through tens of references to rivers changing them to "$ 1 River", regardless of whether the article exists or not. That's called a spree in my book :) I want to hear from a native English speaker that this is really The One True Way(TM) before letting it be.

1958:

Maybe it is in vain, but I would like people that say, I agree with... I hope .... and so on, to structure their minds and put in in an NPOV style proposal or an NPOV style discussion summary. We produced so much kilobytes for only little things. With NPOV style we save time and will have less

1867:

That's why I suggest "universally agreed" as the standard. Even if some ignorant person thinks just "X" is OK, if not everyone else agrees, then any one of them can move it to "X River" and be done. Of course, I'm assuming that there are very few people who would try to insist on "Nile River".

2110:

I feel that this is the situation, with my arguing for "X River" as the basic form (with exceptions) -- & this may be the current practice -- & Tobias arguing for "X" alone (with exceptions). If this is not the case, & we have all been arguing for the same thing, I'm going to feel

1214:

Tobias, you might not know it, but in fact, the Finns are far more proficient in English than, for instance, our fellow countrymen the Germans. Plenty of both governmental information and ordinary www-pages exist in multi-lingual versions, and beside the domestic languages, English and German

1551:

Wouldn't you agree that it is so much more convenient to write "]" and "]" and be sure that this works as planned? The current system is working reasonably well, and, to my best knowledge, you are the first person to have such a strong stand against it. In any case, this should be moved to

2845:

I do not really see why an encyclopedia should follow ISO 8859-1. Why is Zürich called Zurich in english? Because in english they do not use umlauts in general. All the names that were imported into english long time ago, beside some french words, have no diacritics. I allways would prefer

2376:

thats why I put it in the last sentence. 1) Rmhermen, you really say X River is a river?? 2) what about The X ]... there we have the word river. But I can imagine people do not like this. 3) for german english speaker it is super strange to have a Saar redirect to Saarland. Northern is not

1967:

I find it amazing that a native speaker of English is arguing for maximum clarity on the English Knowledge against 3 or 4 editors for whom English is a second (third, or more) language. (And no, I am not trying to insult anyone's grasp of the English language here.) All I can say is never

2609:

clear majority of discussion participants is against "X river". If you join Stan and me and find some supporters than "X"-Riverless has a chance. But I personally do not like diacritics and umlauts in en:WP. It is incredible what all those english-second language people do on en:WP.

864:

I guess you would call it X River if River were actually part of the name. For many rivers (outside USA, UK etc) it isn't, so if you have to use "river" (e.g. because of disambiguation), I suppose it can be anything: inside brackets or not, upper or lower case, before or after X.

2846:

anglicizing. We also do not use cirilic letters in english. Other WPs are much stricter, one will never have so much foreign letters in bulgarian or chinese WP. I just would strip off diacritics everywhere. ;-) But well, we will not solve this question here in the River Project.

2357:

entity, while "the Saar" is a historical region. My old Saar stamps say "Saargebiet" for example. It;s the usual situation of how to describe the history of a region that is similar but not identical to the modern entity; one could probably justify splitting into two articles.

1930:

Willamette river? Or the Rogue river? While I'd argue in favor of the first being famous enough, it suffers from a namespace collision (I believe there is a country by that name); but I wouldn't be surprised if someone were to argue in favor of the other two examples. --

2997:, for example. This will cut down on confusion in articles where the river's total length is actually measured from the source of the longer fork to the mouth of the main river, instead of from the confluence of the forks to the mouth of the main river. Commentario? 1749:

However, if common English usage either puts "River" first as part of the proper noun (e.g. River Cam in Britain), or uses another word instead of river (Rio Grande, Mill Creek), then "river" is not added (thus we should not see Rio Grande River or Starvation Creek

1469:. About the Russian rivers I moved: the towns Ob and Chulym are much less significant than the rivers (maybe not if you live there). If someone writes an article about the towns, he/she could make a line on the main article like "there's also a town called Ob, see 1302:

I think "X" would be a good choice for most rivers outside native English speaking countries. I prefer writing "I was walking long the Danube" to "I was walking along the Danube River". I guess it's different for rivers like Delaware River and the Yellow River.

2677:

Just to get something clear: "X" is allowed if there's nothing else (important) called "X", right? I've seen some pretty useless moves from "X" to "X River", and also lots of "X River" creations when there's no article at "X" (not even redirect or disamb).

3041:

where both rivers flow directly into Lake Superior and there are rivers of the same name in other states. They are disambiguated by the county/state that their mouth is in. I don't think that this is included in the Wikiproject guidelines anywhere though.

2975:. I realize these names are rather long, but disambigs are easy enough to write, and the article names are more exact. As for rivers which have multiple tributaries with the same name, I'm sure that those tributaries can be further disambiguated such as 2670:

German: Atlantik is a noun, Antlantisch is an adjective. In the case of Weser (and all other German, Dutch, French etc. rivers): it's a noun, and the complete name of the river. I don't see "River" as the "family name" of Weser, I wonder if anyone does.

1605:, which is also known as the Kızılırmak river. Admittedly, most people who have heard of the Halys river don't exactly know where it's located, & those who see the Kızılırmak on a map don't immediately know it's the same river as the Halys. 873:

That's exactly why we have to have a single convention, to avoid guessing. Not to say that in one language River may be part of the name, while not in another one, for the same river. In such cases the primary goal is convenience for numerous

1592:

of the article (the magic of linking on Knowledge is that one needs not write "]" but "]" to supress the seond part of the compound noun when needed), there are a couple more details we ought to consider, if we're going to set up a standard:

2058:

poll can then be discussed, so the deficiencies of all of the proposals can be revealed. Right now, with a few rare exceptions, it is impossible to understand what each of the participants wants to see as the final system for naming rivers.

1943:

If there are more, but less significant objects called X, make a reference to the other X or a disambiguation article in the first paragraph, or in italics above it. And if the other X is more important, call the river X river (or X River).

1489:

redirect or disambig from its simple name - then we will always expect in other articles how to refer to the river, even if article about it is not created yet and we do not know are there any other valuable objects with the same name.

2922:

That question has actually come up on the commons, because it's not supposed to favor any particular language. For instance, the pictures of Russian cities are nearly all at Cyrillic titles, although not everybody is happy about that.

2065:

in England), and use "X River" for all the rest. I do not strongly oppose the "X river" variant, but I do not see the benefits of using it either, especially considering the number of changes that need to be done to convert all river

375:

to be either a New World thing, or an indicator of a river being named after something else, like a district or region, and who assume that ] or ] can be used either for rivers in the Old World or for rivers that have a name of their

2094:

I might be one of those arguing for the status quo, but to be honest, I'm still not clear on just what it is we are arguing about. There seems to be a consensus that we should have a basic rule of naming, with exceptions -- but what

1846:

I got inclined to be more severe about usage of foreign words for "river" after seeing confusion in books about Africa, where the same river might pass through French, Spanish, and Portuguese areas. I'm undecided about what I see in

1757:

Spelling should be in Latin-1, unless a good reason can be made for the variance. (The last clause is my addition: think of it as the "if we use Latin-1, then the name becomes an embarassing obscenity in the local language" rule) --

2073:

I think that the reason you do not see the clear definitions of the proposals is that most people are arguing for the status quo, not for a new proposal. I would note again that "X river" is not proper capitalization in English.

1996:

want. They are talking for the use of brackets, for finno-english, for lower case, but I have not seen a complete proposal of them. The only ones that made clear what they favor are Stan, Walt Pohl and me. Tell me if I am wrong

1351:. It may be conventional for rivers in America and the UK to have the word "river" in the name, but it isn't for most European rivers. What I'm doing here is moving "X River" to "X" if there is nothing else called X (like 931:, great chances are that after some time we will have duplicate articles, with pain in the neck remaining to collect all the remaining red links into one place. This kind of discussion happened for numerous other things: 2136:

I am first of all not particularly interested to discuss matters of English usage, non-English speaker as I am. But, I am a bit curious about what you mean by something being the name of a river. Consider the paragraph:

2232:

One does not need to say that something called "X River" is a river. As well there is no need to write "X River river". In case "X River" is obligatory for foreign Rivers except they are very well-known, I would use

1693:

Incidentally, my Chicago manual (13th edition) says "always capitalize generic when used as part of name, but don't say anything about adding "River", confining themselves to a couple examples that I quote verbatim:

1782:

to ask for a clarification. That is also the reason I moved a lot of the older material into an archive, & to put your rephrasing both at the top of the page & keep it next to the rest of the discussion.

958:

I see what you mean, but this confusion can be easily avoided if you check in a list or by searching what's the name of the article you're referring to. For instance, I started to write an article about the city

541:

he means that if it will be decided that both 'X' and 'X River' are valid names, then it is up to the correponding country contributor clique to decide whether they want to rename the existing articles and how.

2364:

I would suggest you use "The Moselle River (French Moselle, German Mosel) is a river flowing through France, Luxembourg and Germany,..." but, at the very least, please remember to include a link to the article

633:

Proper name - usual rule is to capitalize all (OK, almost all) parts. We only write it as "new York city" if we're avant-garde poets. :-) Also, "Delaware River" refers to fewer rivers than "Delaware river".

883:

When writing an article full of personal and geographic names it is a great pain to double-check each and every name. It is especially confusing in the case of missing articles. When we have red links for

2989:

thinking it would be better to make each named "Fork" a subsection of the main river's name, and then make a (properly named) redirect for each "Fork" article that points to the correct river article. So

1753:

In any case, there must be a modifier that indicates that the noun applies to a stream of water: either a familiar term for this body of water ("River" "Stream" "Creek" etc.) or a known foreign word (e.g.

1746:

However, if the river is easily identified by its name alone, then we do not capitalize the river; it is not part of the proper noun. (Example: Danube river , but Columbia River (there are many Columbias).

2688:

that's the way I would use it. and at least create redirect. If creating an article of a river with short naame one might google for other things callled X, create a disambig and so avoid futuer moves.

2646:

just a curios question, can't you say, "I crossed the Atlantic"? In German we also call it "Atlantischer Ozean" but one can shorten it to "Atlantik". Actually there is even a word Atlantiküberquerung.

2317:

For two reasons: Firstly because I'm a German, and as such maybe my view is of lesser relevance; Secondly because I didn't wish to underestimate the intelligence of the reader of this talk page. :-) --

1916:

I'm not sure what you mean by "laymanish" Ruhrjung. Is the word you're looking for "colloquial"? Ich kann Deutsch. Wenn du das exakte Wort auf English nicht weisst, schreib auf Deutsch, dass du meinst.

1821:

likewise). Darya is a Persian word, but the same name is used in Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, even though as far as I know Darya is not an Uzbek or Kazakh word (maybe a native speaker can correct me).

1454:

river I can answer only that my English is not good enough to write encyclopedical articles, but I watch activities in the areas I know something about and I can tell what is good and what is wrong.

2142:

The Moselle (French Moselle, German Mosel) is a river flowing through France, Luxembourg and Germany, joining the Rhine river at Koblenz. Major affluents are the Meurthe, Sauer, Ruwer and the Saar.

2302:

but if you are so suggestive in your example why do you not say what you would like? You can easily state this on the top of the page. There is not that much use allways and only to say what you

1104:

River articles may be named "X", "X River", or "River X", depending on location and most common usage. "X river" is never recommended, and "X (river)" should only be used if absolutely necessary.

49: 2639:

I would oppose because that is not the standard way that geographical objects are referred to in the English language. We could call it the Atlantic but we do call it the Atlantic Ocean.

1529:

I'm not sure that all peple who refer to Chulym mean one or another Chulym - most of people did not hear about both of rivers and a town. Also note that most people (at least outsude the

1502:

The trouble is that there isn't really a platform to discuss this on in detail yet, at least not to my knowledge. If you want to know how to refer to a river, the easiest way is to check

1860:

River by preference. Most people will not know all the uses of a name and what they may think unambiguous may only reflect a limited knowledge of other political or geographical names.

2968: 2830:

set, let's use the diacritics, and if they're not in that set, take the closest "normal" character. As a service to users, we can make redirects from the diacritics-less versions.

1661:

On ancient vs modern names, I think we need to give precedence to modern names, with redirects from various formulations of the ancient forms, just as we do already for cities -

1458:

20:18, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) PS. I also think that system to add River suffixes is very useful (at least for Russian rivers - we very often have other objects with the same name).

994:

Some local river in places other than Britain use River X that is why we use the local use convention. Michigan in the U.S. for instance has River Raisin and River Styx, etc.

1231:

If a Finn, or someone connected to Finland, reacts and tells us that one form is to be considered less correct than another, then we have every reason to take that seriously.

1609:

PS -- I noticed that my proposal for a naming standard (which was never accepted) is still on the subject page as if it is accepted policy. I think it should be removed. --

1597:

There seems to be a tendency on Knowledge to avoid unnecessary capitalization; I have found the form (for example) "Wide River" & "Wide river". Which should we prefer?

2826:

OK, Vietnamese is a problem. So are the Hungarian ő, the Romanian ş, ţ, ă, and several Czech, Polish, Slovak, Croatian and Latvian characters. As long as they are in the

1646: 2812:

content: Cần Thơ, Đà Nẵng, Hải Phòng, Thành phố Hồ Chí, Bắc Giang, Bắc Kạn, Bạc Liêu, Bắc Ninh, Bà Rịa-Vũng Tàu, Bến Tre, Bình Định, Bình Dương, Bình Phước, Bình Thuận

2451:

These pages will be move after five days if people support the move on the talk page of the article to be moved. They will not be moved if people oppose the move (See

1506:. After my moves I was going to change the references there as well. And as for objects with the same name, it's usually clear which one is the most significant, see 1736:

I'm getting confused in this discussion -- although I'm sure some people would say I'm normaly confused. ;-) Let me paraphrase what I think is being proposed here:

2009:

I share Walt Pohl's amazement that this issue is generating such voluminous discussion. The existing convention is quite simple to understand and I oppose any

2972: 1184:

and your own words above were you intervened in the disccusion with the words "It depends on most common local usage." what is helpless in a country where

3010:

A river can be identified uniquely as a tributary of another river. It should be named with the name of the principal river following in parentheses. So

2061:

As for me, I personally support MaxiMaxiMax—use plain "X" only for very well-known rivers, use "River X" when this variant is established (like with the

1063:

No there is River Raisin and River Rouge in Michigan in the United States. Not to mention things like Rio Grande. It depends on most common local usage.

84: 725:

I could not stay away from fixing this :-) I because I do not like upper and lower case X rivers I stick to what is allready used in english countries.

1218:

In effect, English usage of names related to Finland (or in this case, Karelia) is dominated not by native English speakers but by lingua-franca users.

1043:

be clarified, I think "River X" is only used for the UK and one or three Rivers in Spain. I wanted to help your project by turning the russian/finnish

740:

BTW: even if it is decided to name the articles in your way ("X river" I assume, like the counties) what is the problem to redirect the X River there?

263:

If there are more rivers with the same name, disambiguate by country, subnational entity or distributary. To avoid conflicts with cities use brackets

1968:

under-estimate your audience's ability to misunderstand directions -- & I say this based on many months of doing phone support for computers. --

224: 3038: 1246:, that doesn't matter at all. If you want to construct neat lists with "river" behind the name, then do so; it will be taken care of by redirects. 1137:"River X" depending on location and most common usage. Because "River" is an english word, this naming would apply only to english speaking areas. 777:

This is english wikipedia, if the english people say in english, it is common to use X River than this is fine. Isn't it? "River" is part of the

2039:

I also like the agreement that almost all river names have suffix "River". It is no problem if there are several wide-known exeptions such as

1767:

Do not confuse us by not signing your post and by making a new list of proposals. the list of markussep was much more compact than yours. :-)

676:

if you want to go with your non-english proposal as you do with "your" croatian counties than you really have to change a lot of other rivers.

3204: 3199: 2151:. Strangely, only the Rhine has been joined by a "river" (and that without a capital R). Is it really a good Knowledge practice to aim for: 1022:

No, wwe don't need to keep reinventing the wheel. The Wikiproject already describes how to name U.S. rivers and even explains the reasoning.

90: 1685:

in kyrgyz, kazakh, belorussian ... . Latin-1 is allready the beginning of nativizing, because one does not use ä ö ü in "regular" english.

878:; readers are more interested in correct and complete contents of the actual article, which may contain all possible names and spellings. 2377:

redirecting to Northern Territory. Maybe USians should refine their history books? they could use X Area for the historic _entity_. ;-)

2155:

The Moselle (] Moselle, ] Mosel) is a ] flowing through ], ] and ], joining the ] river at ]. Major affluents are the ], ], ] and the ].

34: 2976: 1392:

I guess we should start a proper naming conventions discussion then. As far as I know there aren't any clear rules now, only what's on

3064:

is your friend. It lists all named places in the U.S. that the U.S. government deems official. And it only lists one Wisconsin River.

3034: 1153:

Or make it more clear in another way. For me it was clear before, but I would like to avoid such discussions in future. Best regards

3095: 1552: 1466: 190: 17: 1086:

rules in addition to rules for their own languages (unusual, but not unknown). In the Vuoksi case, I don't see why it's different.

2446:

if a "River Page" is put forward to be moved to a new name, mention of the move should be placed on this page under this section.

3011: 2236:'''Moselle River''' (] Moselle, ] Mosel) flows through ], ] and ], joining the ] at ]. Major affluents are the ]s ], ], ] and ]. 1839:

Otherwise, in English-speaking areas where the local convention is to prefix, say "River X". Examples are River Cam, River Rouge.

256:

Otherwise, in English-speaking areas where the local convention is to prefix, say "River X". Examples are River Cam, River Rouge.

3015: 722:

Then what I wrote further about changes was ment for Sana. You know how I came there? By a non-disambiguated plain Sana link.

30: 531:. My only objection is against undertaking any massive renaming. If a country has a solid cooperation of contributors, like 1537:

mean not the US state but the river, becuse it is more famous, but the state has just name and river has the suffix River.

2419: 79: 2963:. Obviously a couple of those haven't been written yet. :-) Anyways, as far as I'm aware, there will only ever be one 1438: 1393: 1348: 1336: 1332: 1040: 181: 145: 120: 2593:

I proposed because I wanted to revive the discussion. I noticed some pages have been renamed unilaterally (examples:

70: 1721:

maybe one day, because of the well structure and internal consistency, wikipedia manual will be cited. By, e.g. the

538:

seems to propose country by country approach, what does he mean by "standardise to any of valid naming conventions"

328:

X can include Creek, Stream for rivers for which it is conventional (resp. USA, Canada, Australia and UK, Ireland).

2994: 2956: 2948: 2745: 2369:

somewhere in every article about a river. I have found a number recently which haven't had this simple connection.

2629:

I would not oppose. I wonder whether there is something on our planet called Weser but not refering to the River?

2952: 2452: 2439: 1743:

The general rule is that the name of the river comes first, followed by "River", capitalized (e.g. Hudson River).

2960: 2896: 2850: 2816: 2758: 2692: 2650: 2633: 2614: 2461: 2425: 2415: 2990: 2588:

This section is for moves in general please place specific arguments on the talk page of the page to be moved.

3165: 2749: 1848: 1470: 266: 3091: 3061: 1405:

X River or River X for rivers for which it is conventional (resp. USA, Canada, Australia and UK, Ireland).

1282:

X River or River X for rivers for which it is conventional (resp. USA, Canada, Australia and UK, Ireland).

964: 270: 228: 2400:

So if I click on Saar above, what am I to get? The river, the region-Saarland or the surname Saar.....?

1414:

if there are more rivers with the same name, disambiguate by country, subnational entity or distributary.

1291:

if there are more rivers with the same name, disambiguate by country, subnational entity or distributary.

3087: 1836:, use that. Examples are Nile, Danube, Orinoco, Rio Grande (and note anglicized "i" not "í"), Syr Darya. 126: 1181: 1052: 1011: 496:

use "X River" in all cases EXCEPT where there are credible and verifiable sources indicating that the

157: 139: 1677:

nativizing can really be a mess. e.g. there are more than five versions to write the arabic term for

986:. 'River X' is reserved to British, the rest of the unknown waterflows it is better to be 'X River'. 645:

Er, how is "River" part of a proper name of a river that isn't in an area where English is spoken? --

912: 253:, use that. Examples are Nile, Danube, Orinoco, Rio Grande (note anglicized "i" not "í"), Syr Darya. 3182: 3172: 3159: 3149: 3135: 3125: 3104: 2893: 2847: 2813: 2809: 2777: 2761: 2755: 2732: 2695: 2689: 2682: 2647: 2630: 2611: 2517: 2465: 2428: 2422: 2404: 2378: 2307: 2002: 1960: 1768: 1726: 1686: 1654: 1447: 1313: 1200: 1154: 1075: 1056: 978:

To my understanding, river name 'X' is better to have for major internationally known rivers, like

944: 928: 897: 816: 782: 726: 497: 464: 60: 908: 900: 189:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

3180: 3157: 3133: 3102: 3080: 3028: 3001: 2983: 2559: 2401: 1023: 924: 916: 893: 885: 386:

there are people that would like to apply general disambig rules when other things called X exist

75: 3142: 1649:

were I also tried to streamline a more complex subject than just names of Rivers ;-) I inserted

1411:

In case there are also towns, lakes etc. called X we should call the river X River or X (river).

1288:

In case there are also towns, lakes etc. called X we should call the river X River or X (river).

588:

use? (people that took part in discussion, but it is not clear what kind of rule they support)

2723: 2545: 2531: 2475: 2031: 446: 56: 1778:

Well, with the discussion being so wide-ranging, & a number of topics being mentioned, I

1645:

put all our knowledge together and streamline the discussion. Maybe someone likes to look at

283:

instead of enlarging the discussion, you can write you point of view here directly. use NPOV

3118: 3111: 2726:

are currently mostly "River"-less); if different "X River" exist, use bracket-disambiguation

2503: 2489: 2049: 2010: 1681:, because it is used in variants in other languages. as well as the variants of the russian 1538: 1503: 1490: 1459: 1455: 1430: 1426: 1141:"X river" is never recommended, and "X (river)" should only be used if absolutely necessary. 932: 904: 482: 173: 3054:

Also in Michigan, I think, some rivers are disambiguated by the county there mouth is in.

3020:

So then, how to deal with the two tributaries of the Columbia or Snake or whichever, named

889: 400:

different approach here, because they are less afraid of having the word River in the name

2964: 2924: 2870: 2801: 2358: 2254: 2250: 2173: 2169: 2124: 1869: 1852: 1714: 1670: 1582: 1566: 1087: 635: 458: 2722:; this does not say what has to be used in general, whether plain "X" or "X River" (e.g. 1899:

is somewhat laymanish, isn't it? I feel pretty uneasy when sounding it in my head. Shrug!

455:

supporters (this is not voting!, please remove a name, if putting it here was a mistake)

1323:

and into lists of rivers quoted there. It is a common convention to name river as e.g.,

2967:

in the world. So then what to do about the Eau Claire Rivers. I've redlinked them as

2831: 2729: 2679: 2671: 2622: 2602: 2521: 2469: 2349: 1944: 1822: 1722: 1523: 1482: 1418: 1356: 1324: 1306: 1055:. As I can see it, River Vuoks is the only example outsied UK/Spain in River X format. 972: 948: 866: 520:("River"-less only for very well known rivers) and it is always X River, never X river. 470: 445:

this does not say what has to be used in general, whether plain "X" or "X River" (e.g.

3033:

Not sure that that situation has come up but I note that for Michigan rivers, we have

2123:

I agree that the "X"/"X River" choice of default is the only genuinely unclear point.

3193: 3177: 3169: 3154: 3146: 3130: 3122: 3099: 3077: 3065: 3043: 3025: 2998: 2980: 2662: 2640: 2567: 2563: 2387: 2370: 2318: 2281: 2225: 2204: 2148: 2075: 1978: 1902: 1861: 1794: 1619: 1555:

and discussed there with that project's participants before any more moves are done.—

1364: 1340: 1267: 1168: 1064: 1027: 995: 987: 951: 591: 543: 528: 517: 476: 3086:

Oh boy. There are at least 2 Wolf Rivers in Wisconsin. One is a tributary of the

3021: 3007:

We already have a couple of protocols which yield shorter names than your examples:

2789: 2549: 2535: 2525: 2479: 2443: 2116: 2062: 2023: 1969: 1931: 1885: 1784: 1759: 1631: 1610: 1522:

all the time when it's clear that most people who refer to Ob would mean the river.

1239: 1235: 1074:- how do you apply this to a river flowing in a russian and finnish speaking area? 1048: 1044: 506: 488: 1429:

20:01, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) PS. There are at least 3 rivers with name Oka in Russia.

1260:

or the opposite, but maybe we should make it a tad clearer why and when we prefer

3098:. Naming ideas welcomed either here or on the individual articles' talk pages. 2752:, he seems not to like talk. instead of responding to my question he did blank: 2598: 2507: 2493: 2289: 2285: 2270: 2212: 2208: 2193: 2083: 2067: 1952: 1896: 1713:

They also refer people to an atlas or gazetteer for the correct form of a name.

1642: 1602: 1556: 1534: 1378: 1015: 1003: 601: 583:"River"-less only for very well known rivers, not strongly opposed to lowercase. 580: 403: 355: 2082:

River" variant is also considered to be improper capitalization in some cases.—

512:

he quoted Bkonrad and added "This is the idomatic form for titles of articles."

3076:

there was only one Wisconsin River!!! :-p Maybe some day on Mars tho... :-D

2827: 2800:

Present-day Britannica uses umlauts and such also, so we have good precedent.

2594: 2553: 2539: 2293: 2262: 2216: 2185: 1984:

I tried to find out what those people that do not like the method to use only

1818: 1478: 960: 755:

Oh, of course. But you're not making redirects in that direction right now. --

672:

Kako? I am on a spree? Everything ok with you? It is not only about reverting

317: 163: 2511: 1828:

I would tinker with llywrch's suggestion a bit to make it more algorithmic:

1814: 1810: 1806: 1650: 1641:

What we discuss will be lost to the world. But we can work on article about

1574: 1295: 1252:

There is no need what-so-ever for Knowledge-style to express preference for

963:

but found out via German wikipedia that there was already an article called

338: 321: 244:

Feel free to edit, write NPOV, to keep it short do not sign if not neccesary

278:

Discussion summary - !you can write here directly! to keep discussion short

2728:) are copied to the project page, and maybe also to "naming conventions". 1249:

Similarly, categories can, if wished, be neatified with the help of pipes.

2483: 2345: 1666: 1519: 1511: 943:, even if sometimes it produces awkward and unusual article titles, like 844: 802: 756: 713: 693: 663: 646: 622: 596: 1787:

23:53, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) (remembering the 4 magic characters this time)

1093:

that would mean to use "X River". Stan can you change the Naming section

2333: 2329: 2274: 2266: 2200: 2189: 801:"Sava", too, which is IMHO the best as it's closest to the original. -- 532: 3117:

Could those interested please review and comment on the discussion at

1437:

he did not claim his own rules, or his own rules where the same as on

1363:

as a courtesy to other countless editors who provided original names.

361:

some people, esp. English speakers, prefer to use this as general rule

2258: 2181: 2044: 2019: 1851:, I suppose they could be justified as "River"-less under my rule 1. 1682: 1678: 1662: 1507: 1474: 1352: 1243: 3057:

The Forks idea sounds good. The fewer articles the better, I think.

1294:

to be solved: translation of foreign words, meaning "River" like in

1167:

use the most common name, we don't try to make up names ourselves.

2497: 2366: 2337: 2278: 2177: 1565:(I moved the discussion to the bottom, to reduce the timewarping. 1441:. It is not a matter where he comes from. If there is Ob City and 1328: 1320: 983: 920: 335:

in these countries because it is actually part of the name there.

307: 186: 1234:

Redirects can not, in my sincerest opinion, be a matter here. If

3090:(presently there is an article on this river, unhelpfully named 2341: 2040: 2015: 1581:

is a little strange, because it's not one of those famous ones.

1007: 979: 936: 709: 705:- well maybe by changing I suddenly see it exists. :-) --Tobias 303: 811:

I like plain Sava as well. Seems to be a conflict only between

1578: 1530: 102: 25: 2808:

I wonder how they can be consistent and usable if they have

1653:

in the proposal of Markussep, as something to be addressed.

1339:

before unertaking massive changes like this one. Thank you.

1832:

If the river has a universally-agreed and unambiguous name

1515: 249:

If the river has a universally-agreed and unambiguous name

1588:

While I, too, lean towards the form "Rhine River" for the

1131:"X" in case where X is unambigously the name for the River 500:

of English-language usage warrants using some other form.'

3141:

Seeing no comment or objection, I'm going to move it to

2892:

will we put chinese rivers under their ideographs then?

1790:

Seems to me as if you've clarified Tobias' position. :-)

1242:, or the other way around, or if they both redirects to 452:

if different "X River" exist, use bracket-disambiguation

2969:

Eau Claire River (Chippewa River (Wisconsin) tributary)

2753: 2700:

It's about time the naming rules we agreed upon above (

1951:

not just simply apply the usual disambiguation rules? /

843:

something before normalizing everything to one form. --

723: 1319:

Why are you renaming River articles? Please look into

1959:

probability to miss somthing that was said. regards

1327:. If you disagee, please discuss this, e.g., at the 185:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2528:(move request made at ... 00:41, 26 July 2005 (UTC) 1601:because I encountered this problem concerning the 2977:Salmon River (Snake River tributary (Washington)) 2576:add any more "Requested moves" above this message 2348:, is it usual in English to call Saarland Saar?. 2328:with the same name: (former) French départements 1647:Knowledge:WikiProject Subnational entities/Naming 2621:OK, back to Wümme and Weser: why not move them? 2384:Yes, that's Knowledge's primary mission! ;-: --> 2344:area. BTW I'm not so happy with the redirect to 1070:Rio Grande does not have the term River inside. 939:, etc. And nearly always the best solution is a 411:this is mostly supported by non-English-speakers 389:this is mostly supported by non-English-speakers 2556:move request made at 14:51, 28 July 2005 (UTC) 2500:(move request made at 12:58, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)) 2486:(move request made at 12:50, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)) 1377:name helps alleviate the problem considerably.— 509:("River"-less only for very well known rivers) 491:("River"-less only for very well known rivers) 292:Five variants to name an river article exist: 2542:move request made at 14:33, 28 July 2005 (UTC) 2514:(move request made at 13:12, 8 Jul 2005 (UTC)) 485:("River"-less only for very well known rivers) 479:("River"-less only for very well known rivers) 8: 2973:Eau Claire River (Wisconsin River tributary) 2942:Looking for comments on my idea about naming 3094:), the other a tributary of the North Fork 1793:That doesn't make me support it, though. -- 1518:. I think it's a bit of a nuisance to type 1195:if you think it is wrong make a better one. 1126:River articles may be named (in that order) 1215:parallel texts are definitely not unusual. 1035:River X / X River - need for clarification 134: 225:Knowledge:Naming conventions (landforms)‎ 119:does not require a rating on Knowledge's 2784:River X outside english-speaking country 2001:please show where to find your proposal 1977:it's how we name rivers in English. -- 3039:Iron River (Marquette County, Michigan) 1180:Rmhermen, as you may have noticed from 136: 3166:Talk:Río de la Plata#Final naming poll 314:X can include foreign words for river 573:for english-native countries), allow 7: 2014:primarily to the river (such as the 621:Why? What's wrong with lowercase? -- 108: 106: 1439:Knowledge:WikiProject_Rivers#Naming 1394:Knowledge:WikiProject_Rivers#Naming 1349:Knowledge:WikiProject_Rivers#Naming 1041:Knowledge:WikiProject_Rivers#Naming 125:It is of interest to the following 33:for discussing improvements to the 3035:Iron River (Iron County, Michigan) 1465:Let's continue this discussion at 1002:By the way, did you know there is 449:are currently mostly "River"-less) 24: 3119:Talk:River Plate#River Plate name 3096:Eau Claire River (Chippewa River) 2718:for english-nativ countries) and 2472:(move request made at 5 Jun 2005) 1467:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rivers 947:, who is overwhelmingly known as 439:for english-nativ countries) and 179:This page is within the scope of 18:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Rivers 3164:There is now a vote going on at 3012:St. Joseph River (Lake Michigan) 2444:Relevant policies and guidelines 1081:The general rule is most common 610:lowercase/uppercase in the title 467:("River"-less generally allowed) 461:("River"-less generally allowed) 166: 156: 138: 107: 50:Click here to start a new topic. 3016:St. Joseph River (Maumee River) 2411:TODO: wrong namings/help needed 1018:city? 21:59, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1010:(I suggest to name the article 708:That particular part refers to 371:there are people that consider 1805:I hope no one wants to change 662:without a precise answer... -- 616:"X river" is never recommended 1: 3160:06:27, 29 December 2005 (UTC) 3136:05:17, 27 December 2005 (UTC) 3068:23:47, August 10, 2005 (UTC) 3030:08:34, August 11, 2005 (UTC) 3003:19:44, August 10, 2005 (UTC) 2985:19:37, August 10, 2005 (UTC) 2733:12:08, 3 September 2005 (UTC) 2696:08:04, 3 September 2005 (UTC) 2683:13:32, 2 September 2005 (UTC) 2420:List_of_rivers_of_New_Zealand 1051:, but this was reversed, see 331:that means you can also have 193:and see a list of open tasks. 47:Put new text under old text. 3205:NA-importance River articles 3200:Project-Class River articles 3183:04:28, 22 January 2006 (UTC) 3105:22:24, 17 October 2005 (UTC) 3082:08:34, August 11, 2005 (UTC) 3060:As for the Wisconsin River, 3046:16:03, August 11, 2005 (UTC) 2084:Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 2068:Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 1557:Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 1553:WikiProject Rivers talk page 1379:Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 1337:Knowledge:Naming conventions 1333:Knowledge:WikiProject Rivers 199:Knowledge:WikiProject Rivers 2748:were moved to X (river) by 2277:. Major affluents are the 1992:for english countries) and 1190:not as clear as it could be 202:Template:WikiProject Rivers 55:New to Knowledge? Welcome! 3221: 2995:Chippewa River (Wisconsin) 2957:Chippewa River (Minnesota) 2949:Chippewa River (Wisconsin) 2746:Category:Rivers_of_Ecuador 2661:their full personal name. 2570:move request made at .... 2373:23:23, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC) 2228:01:33, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC) 2203:. Major affluents are the 2078:14:07, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC) 2070:18:54, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC) 1864:05:44, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC) 1569:22:31, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)) 1134:"X River" in ambigous case 222: 2979:or whatever. Thoughts? 2953:Chippewa River (Michigan) 2762:13:03, 25 July 2005 (UTC) 2643:14:19, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC) 2605:11:38, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC) 2453:Knowledge:Requested moves 2440:Knowledge:Requested moves 2405:01:43, 19 June 2006 (UTC) 2390:15:53, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC) 2381:10:23, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC) 2361:18:34, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC) 2352:09:30, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC) 2321:15:53, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC) 2119:23:09, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC) 2086:17:13, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC) 2034:19:57, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC) 2005:18:10, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1981:08:04, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1963:20:17, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1955:14:50, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1947:11:55, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1905:07:30, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC) 1855:04:19, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1842:Otherwise, use "X River". 1825:20:23, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1797:00:04, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC) 1717:13:24, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1673:13:15, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1622:00:52, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC) 1613:23:35, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1585:22:55, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1559:21:04, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC) 1526:20:46, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1485:20:27, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1462:20:21, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1450:20:11, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1433:20:03, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1421:19:31, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1381:17:58, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC) 1359:16:42, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1343:16:34, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1309:19:31, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1270:15:46, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC) 1067:00:48, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC) 1030:00:34, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC) 998:00:34, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC) 990:21:59, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 975:11:55, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC) 869:20:07, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 473:(preferably "River"-less) 259:Otherwise, use "X River". 151: 133: 85:Be welcoming to newcomers 35:WikiProject Rivers/Naming 2991:East Fork Chippewa River 2961:Chippewa River (Ontario) 2804:12:05, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2674:17:26, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2665:15:45, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC) 2636:14:04, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2625:10:11, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2617:14:39, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC) 2462:Talk:Colorado River (US) 2416:Tweed River, New Zealand 2310:05:12, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC) 2127:18:34, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC) 2099:this basic rule? Is it: 2052:05:51, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1972:00:55, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1934:00:55, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1888:06:42, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1872:06:09, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1771:19:19, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1762:19:21, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1729:15:10, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1689:15:10, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1657:03:23, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1634:18:30, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1541:20:56, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1493:20:36, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1446:living at those rivers. 1367:17:31, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1203:17:56, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1171:15:55, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC) 1090:13:52, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1078:01:51, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC) 1059:21:24, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC) 954:21:42, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 819:20:46, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC) 785:11:37, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC) 729:12:43, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC) 703:whether it exists or not 638:00:09, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC) 629:20:22, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC) 546:23:53, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC) 239:Proposal to be worked on 2927:19:34, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2899:17:56, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2873:15:23, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2853:14:15, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2834:10:09, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2819:13:04, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2653:15:27, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC) 2429:03:06, 3 May 2005 (UTC) 1312:Discussion copied from 1157:15:36, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC) 267:Indian River (Michigan) 3092:Wolf River (Wisconsin) 2750:User:2004-12-29T22:45Z 1849:Category:German rivers 1471:Ob, Novosibirsk Oblast 1186:no english local usage 965:Echternach, Luxembourg 271:Indian River, Michigan 229:Knowledge:Proper names 80:avoid personal attacks 3088:Fox River (Wisconsin) 2257:Mosel) flows through 1072:most common local use 2159:or would we prefer: 1188:can be found, it is 2810:vietnamese language 2778:River Tyne, England 2767:Names to be watched 2582:Discussion on moves 2518:Talk:Vilnia (river) 2466:Colorado River (US) 2147:That's quoted from 1314:User_talk:Markussep 971:of disambiguation. 945:Vasili IV of Russia 525:unclear supporters 494:his wording appr.: 465:User:Tobias Conradi 354:if there are other 2560:Talk:Dnieper river 1408:otherwise plain X. 1285:otherwise plain X. 1024:Volga River (Iowa) 1014:), in addition to 182:WikiProject Rivers 121:content assessment 91:dispute resolution 52: 3110:Input request at 2724:rivers of Germany 2706:naming variants: 2546:Talk:Drin (river) 2532:Talk:Spui (river) 2476:Talk:Wuemme River 2011:instruction creep 1709:Rio Grande River) 1698:Kaskaskia River ( 1182:Talk:River_Vuoksi 1115:to something like 1053:Talk:River Vuoksi 1012:Volga River, Iowa 933:Aircraft carriers 849: 848: 807: 806: 761: 760: 718: 717: 698: 697: 668: 667: 651: 650: 627: 626: 561:naming variants, 447:rivers of Germany 427:naming variants: 221: 220: 217: 216: 213: 212: 101: 100: 71:Assume good faith 48: 3212: 3175: 3152: 3128: 3112:Talk:River Plate 2504:Talk:Negro River 2490:Talk:Weser River 2180:flowing through 2030: 1895:But the ring of 1834:in English usage 1504:Rivers of Russia 847: 846: 805: 804: 759: 758: 716: 715: 696: 695: 666: 665: 649: 648: 625: 624: 483:User:Maximaximax 251:in English usage 207: 206: 203: 200: 197: 176: 174:Geography portal 171: 170: 169: 160: 153: 152: 142: 135: 112: 111: 110: 103: 26: 3220: 3219: 3215: 3214: 3213: 3211: 3210: 3209: 3190: 3189: 3173: 3150: 3143:Río de la Plata 3126: 3115: 2993:would point to 2965:Wisconsin River 2944: 2798: 2786: 2774: 2769: 2743: 2741:Undesired Moves 2584: 2436: 2434:Requested moves 2413: 2134: 2026: 1702:the river Elbe) 1533:) who refer to 1347:Take a look at 1037: 1026:is the format. 941:single solution 612: 459:User:Stan Shebs 420: 290: 288:Naming variants 280: 241: 236: 231: 204: 201: 198: 195: 194: 172: 167: 165: 97: 96: 66: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3218: 3216: 3208: 3207: 3202: 3192: 3191: 3188: 3187: 3186: 3185: 3114: 3108: 3084: 3083: 3052: 3051: 3050: 3049: 3048: 3047: 3008: 2943: 2940: 2939: 2938: 2937: 2936: 2935: 2934: 2933: 2932: 2931: 2930: 2929: 2928: 2909: 2908: 2907: 2906: 2905: 2904: 2903: 2902: 2901: 2900: 2894:Tobias Conradi 2881: 2880: 2879: 2878: 2877: 2876: 2875: 2874: 2859: 2858: 2857: 2856: 2855: 2854: 2848:Tobias Conradi 2838: 2837: 2836: 2835: 2821: 2820: 2814:Tobias Conradi 2797: 2794: 2793: 2792: 2785: 2782: 2781: 2780: 2773: 2772:comma disambig 2770: 2768: 2765: 2756:Tobias Conradi 2742: 2739: 2738: 2737: 2736: 2735: 2690:Tobias Conradi 2667: 2666: 2658: 2657: 2656: 2655: 2654: 2648:Tobias Conradi 2631:Tobias Conradi 2619: 2618: 2591: 2590: 2583: 2580: 2579: 2578: 2572: 2571: 2557: 2543: 2529: 2522:Vilnia (river) 2515: 2501: 2487: 2473: 2470:Colorado River 2458: 2457: 2438:Under current 2435: 2432: 2423:Tobias Conradi 2412: 2409: 2398: 2397: 2396: 2395: 2394: 2393: 2392: 2391: 2379:Tobias Conradi 2325: 2324: 2323: 2322: 2312: 2311: 2308:Tobias Conradi 2300: 2299: 2298: 2269:, joining the 2240: 2239: 2238: 2237: 2222: 2221: 2192:, joining the 2157: 2156: 2145: 2144: 2133: 2130: 2129: 2128: 2108: 2107: 2104: 2092: 2091: 2090: 2089: 2088: 2087: 2059: 2054: 2053: 2036: 2035: 2003:Tobias Conradi 1974: 1973: 1961:Tobias Conradi 1940: 1939: 1938: 1937: 1936: 1935: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1909: 1908: 1907: 1906: 1900: 1890: 1889: 1876: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1844: 1843: 1840: 1837: 1803: 1802: 1801: 1800: 1799: 1798: 1791: 1773: 1772: 1769:Tobias Conradi 1764: 1763: 1755: 1751: 1747: 1744: 1740: 1739: 1738: 1737: 1731: 1730: 1727:Tobias Conradi 1723:Chicago manual 1711: 1710: 1703: 1691: 1690: 1687:Tobias Conradi 1659: 1658: 1655:Tobias Conradi 1638: 1637: 1636: 1635: 1624: 1623: 1607: 1606: 1598: 1563: 1562: 1561: 1560: 1545: 1544: 1543: 1542: 1500: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1496: 1495: 1494: 1448:Tobias Conradi 1416: 1415: 1412: 1409: 1406: 1402: 1401: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1397: 1396:. My proposal: 1385: 1384: 1383: 1382: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1368: 1325:Missouri River 1300: 1299: 1292: 1289: 1286: 1283: 1278:My proposal: 1276: 1275: 1274: 1273: 1272: 1271: 1265: 1250: 1247: 1232: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1219: 1216: 1207: 1206: 1205: 1204: 1201:Tobias Conradi 1198: 1197: 1196: 1193: 1173: 1172: 1164: 1163: 1162: 1161: 1160: 1159: 1158: 1155:Tobias Conradi 1139: 1138: 1135: 1132: 1123: 1122: 1121: 1120: 1119: 1118: 1117: 1116: 1101: 1100: 1099: 1098: 1097: 1096: 1095: 1094: 1076:Tobias Conradi 1057:Tobias Conradi 1036: 1033: 1032: 1031: 1000: 999: 956: 955: 949:Vasili Shuisky 913:Quaxan (river) 880: 879: 862: 861: 860: 859: 858: 857: 856: 855: 854: 853: 852: 851: 829: 828: 827: 826: 825: 824: 823: 822: 821: 820: 817:Tobias Conradi 791: 790: 789: 788: 787: 786: 783:Tobias Conradi 770: 769: 768: 767: 766: 765: 764: 763: 746: 745: 744: 743: 742: 741: 738: 737: 736: 735: 734: 733: 732: 731: 730: 727:Tobias Conradi 682: 681: 680: 679: 678: 677: 656: 655: 654: 653: 640: 639: 619: 618: 611: 608: 607: 606: 605: 604: 599: 594: 586: 585: 584: 555: 554: 553: 552: 551: 550: 549: 548: 547: 523: 522: 521: 515: 514: 513: 504: 503: 502: 486: 480: 474: 471:User:Markussep 468: 462: 453: 450: 419: 418:Naming methods 416: 415: 414: 413: 412: 409: 406:Google for it) 392: 391: 390: 387: 379: 378: 377: 364: 363: 362: 359: 347: 346: 345: 344: 343: 326: 289: 286: 279: 276: 261: 260: 257: 254: 240: 237: 235: 232: 219: 218: 215: 214: 211: 210: 208: 205:River articles 191:the discussion 178: 177: 161: 149: 148: 143: 131: 130: 124: 113: 99: 98: 95: 94: 87: 82: 73: 67: 65: 64: 53: 44: 43: 40: 39: 38: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3217: 3206: 3203: 3201: 3198: 3197: 3195: 3184: 3181: 3179: 3176: 3171: 3167: 3163: 3162: 3161: 3158: 3156: 3153: 3148: 3144: 3140: 3139: 3138: 3137: 3134: 3132: 3129: 3124: 3120: 3113: 3109: 3107: 3106: 3103: 3101: 3097: 3093: 3089: 3081: 3079: 3075: 3071: 3070: 3069: 3067: 3063: 3058: 3055: 3045: 3040: 3036: 3032: 3031: 3029: 3027: 3023: 3019: 3018: 3017: 3013: 3009: 3006: 3005: 3004: 3002: 3000: 2996: 2992: 2986: 2984: 2982: 2978: 2974: 2970: 2966: 2962: 2958: 2954: 2950: 2941: 2926: 2921: 2920: 2919: 2918: 2917: 2916: 2915: 2914: 2913: 2912: 2911: 2910: 2898: 2895: 2891: 2890: 2889: 2888: 2887: 2886: 2885: 2884: 2883: 2882: 2872: 2867: 2866: 2865: 2864: 2863: 2862: 2861: 2860: 2852: 2849: 2844: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2840: 2839: 2833: 2829: 2825: 2824: 2823: 2822: 2818: 2815: 2811: 2807: 2806: 2805: 2803: 2795: 2791: 2788: 2787: 2783: 2779: 2776: 2775: 2771: 2766: 2764: 2763: 2760: 2757: 2754: 2751: 2747: 2740: 2734: 2731: 2727: 2725: 2721: 2717: 2713: 2709: 2703: 2699: 2698: 2697: 2694: 2691: 2687: 2686: 2685: 2684: 2681: 2675: 2673: 2664: 2659: 2652: 2649: 2645: 2644: 2642: 2638: 2637: 2635: 2632: 2628: 2627: 2626: 2624: 2616: 2613: 2608: 2607: 2606: 2604: 2600: 2596: 2589: 2586: 2585: 2581: 2577: 2574: 2573: 2569: 2568:Dnieper River 2565: 2564:Dnieper river 2561: 2558: 2555: 2551: 2547: 2544: 2541: 2537: 2533: 2530: 2527: 2523: 2519: 2516: 2513: 2509: 2505: 2502: 2499: 2495: 2491: 2488: 2485: 2481: 2477: 2474: 2471: 2467: 2463: 2460: 2459: 2456: 2454: 2449: 2448: 2447: 2445: 2441: 2433: 2431: 2430: 2427: 2424: 2421: 2417: 2410: 2408: 2406: 2403: 2389: 2383: 2382: 2380: 2375: 2374: 2372: 2368: 2363: 2362: 2360: 2355: 2354: 2353: 2351: 2347: 2343: 2339: 2335: 2331: 2320: 2316: 2315: 2314: 2313: 2309: 2305: 2301: 2297: 2295: 2291: 2287: 2283: 2280: 2276: 2272: 2268: 2264: 2260: 2256: 2252: 2248: 2247:Moselle River 2244: 2243: 2242: 2241: 2235: 2234: 2231: 2230: 2229: 2227: 2220: 2218: 2214: 2210: 2206: 2205:Meurthe River 2202: 2198: 2195: 2191: 2187: 2183: 2179: 2175: 2171: 2167: 2166:Moselle River 2162: 2161: 2160: 2154: 2153: 2152: 2150: 2149:Moselle River 2143: 2140: 2139: 2138: 2132:Moselle River 2131: 2126: 2122: 2121: 2120: 2118: 2114: 2105: 2103:"X River"; or 2102: 2101: 2100: 2098: 2085: 2080: 2079: 2077: 2072: 2071: 2069: 2064: 2060: 2056: 2055: 2051: 2046: 2042: 2038: 2037: 2033: 2029: 2025: 2021: 2017: 2012: 2008: 2007: 2006: 2004: 2000: 1995: 1991: 1987: 1982: 1980: 1971: 1966: 1965: 1964: 1962: 1956: 1954: 1948: 1946: 1933: 1928: 1927: 1926: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1915: 1914: 1913: 1912: 1911: 1910: 1904: 1898: 1894: 1893: 1892: 1891: 1887: 1883: 1878: 1877: 1871: 1866: 1865: 1863: 1858: 1857: 1856: 1854: 1850: 1841: 1838: 1835: 1831: 1830: 1829: 1826: 1824: 1820: 1816: 1812: 1808: 1796: 1792: 1789: 1788: 1786: 1781: 1777: 1776: 1775: 1774: 1770: 1766: 1765: 1761: 1756: 1752: 1748: 1745: 1742: 1741: 1735: 1734: 1733: 1732: 1728: 1724: 1720: 1719: 1718: 1716: 1708: 1704: 1701: 1697: 1696: 1695: 1688: 1684: 1680: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1672: 1668: 1664: 1656: 1652: 1648: 1644: 1640: 1639: 1633: 1628: 1627: 1626: 1625: 1621: 1616: 1615: 1614: 1612: 1604: 1599: 1596: 1595: 1594: 1591: 1586: 1584: 1580: 1576: 1570: 1568: 1558: 1554: 1549: 1548: 1547: 1546: 1540: 1536: 1532: 1528: 1527: 1525: 1521: 1517: 1513: 1509: 1505: 1501: 1492: 1487: 1486: 1484: 1480: 1476: 1472: 1468: 1464: 1463: 1461: 1457: 1452: 1451: 1449: 1444: 1440: 1436: 1435: 1434: 1432: 1428: 1422: 1420: 1413: 1410: 1407: 1404: 1403: 1395: 1391: 1390: 1389: 1388: 1387: 1386: 1380: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1372: 1366: 1361: 1360: 1358: 1354: 1350: 1346: 1345: 1344: 1342: 1338: 1334: 1330: 1326: 1322: 1317: 1315: 1310: 1308: 1304: 1297: 1293: 1290: 1287: 1284: 1281: 1280: 1279: 1269: 1266: 1263: 1259: 1255: 1251: 1248: 1245: 1241: 1238:redirects to 1237: 1233: 1230: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1225: 1217: 1213: 1212: 1211: 1210: 1209: 1208: 1202: 1199: 1194: 1191: 1187: 1183: 1179: 1178: 1177: 1176: 1175: 1174: 1170: 1165: 1156: 1152: 1151: 1150: 1149: 1148: 1147: 1146: 1145: 1144: 1143: 1136: 1133: 1130: 1129: 1128: 1127: 1114: 1113: 1112: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1107: 1106: 1105: 1092: 1091: 1089: 1084: 1080: 1079: 1077: 1073: 1069: 1068: 1066: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1058: 1054: 1050: 1046: 1042: 1034: 1029: 1025: 1021: 1020: 1019: 1017: 1013: 1009: 1005: 997: 993: 992: 991: 989: 985: 981: 976: 974: 968: 966: 962: 953: 950: 946: 942: 938: 934: 930: 929:Qazan (river) 926: 922: 918: 914: 910: 906: 902: 899: 898:Qaxan (river) 895: 891: 887: 882: 881: 877: 872: 871: 870: 868: 850: 841: 840: 839: 838: 837: 836: 835: 834: 833: 832: 831: 830: 818: 814: 810: 809: 808: 799: 798: 797: 796: 795: 794: 793: 792: 784: 781:proper name. 780: 776: 775: 774: 773: 772: 771: 762: 754: 753: 752: 751: 750: 749: 748: 747: 739: 728: 724: 721: 720: 719: 711: 707: 706: 704: 701: 700: 699: 690: 689: 688: 687: 686: 685: 684: 683: 675: 671: 670: 669: 660: 659: 658: 657: 652: 644: 643: 642: 641: 637: 632: 631: 630: 628: 617: 614: 613: 609: 603: 600: 598: 595: 593: 592:User:Ruhrjung 590: 589: 587: 582: 579: 578: 576: 572: 568: 564: 560: 556: 545: 540: 539: 537: 536: 534: 530: 529:User:Mikkalai 527: 526: 524: 519: 518:User:Rmhermen 516: 511: 510: 508: 505: 501: 499: 498:preponderance 493: 492: 490: 487: 484: 481: 478: 477:User:Waltpohl 475: 472: 469: 466: 463: 460: 457: 456: 454: 451: 448: 444: 443: 442: 438: 434: 430: 426: 422: 421: 417: 410: 407: 405: 398: 397: 396: 393: 388: 385: 384: 383: 380: 374: 370: 369: 368: 365: 360: 357: 353: 352: 351: 348: 342: 340: 334: 330: 329: 327: 325: 323: 319: 313: 312: 311: 309: 305: 299: 295: 294: 293: 287: 285: 284: 277: 275: 274: 272: 268: 258: 255: 252: 248: 247: 246: 245: 238: 233: 230: 226: 209: 192: 188: 184: 183: 175: 164: 162: 159: 155: 154: 150: 147: 144: 141: 137: 132: 128: 122: 118: 114: 105: 104: 92: 88: 86: 83: 81: 77: 74: 72: 69: 68: 62: 58: 57:Learn to edit 54: 51: 46: 45: 42: 41: 36: 32: 28: 27: 19: 3116: 3085: 3073: 3059: 3056: 3053: 3022:Salmon River 2987: 2945: 2799: 2790:River Vuoksi 2744: 2719: 2715: 2711: 2707: 2705: 2701: 2676: 2668: 2620: 2592: 2587: 2575: 2550:Drin (river) 2536:Spui (river) 2526:Vilnia River 2480:Wuemme River 2450: 2437: 2414: 2399: 2326: 2303: 2246: 2245: 2223: 2196: 2176:Mosel) is a 2165: 2163: 2158: 2146: 2141: 2135: 2115:foolish. -- 2112: 2109: 2096: 2093: 2066:references.— 2063:River Thames 2027: 1998: 1993: 1989: 1985: 1983: 1975: 1957: 1949: 1941: 1881: 1845: 1833: 1827: 1804: 1779: 1712: 1706: 1705:Rio Grande ( 1699: 1692: 1660: 1608: 1589: 1587: 1571: 1564: 1442: 1423: 1417: 1318: 1311: 1305: 1301: 1277: 1261: 1257: 1253: 1240:Vuoksi River 1236:River Vuoksi 1189: 1185: 1142: 1140: 1125: 1124: 1103: 1102: 1082: 1071: 1049:Vuoksi River 1045:River Vuoksi 1038: 1001: 977: 969: 957: 940: 909:Quaxan river 901:Quaxan River 875: 863: 812: 778: 702: 673: 620: 615: 574: 570: 566: 562: 558: 495: 489:User:Bkonrad 440: 436: 432: 428: 424: 401: 394: 381: 372: 366: 349: 336: 332: 315: 301: 297: 291: 282: 281: 264: 262: 250: 243: 242: 180: 127:WikiProjects 117:project page 116: 29:This is the 3121:. Thanks, 2710:(including 2599:Regen river 2508:Negro River 2494:Weser River 2336:, the town 2271:Rhine River 2213:Ruwer River 2209:Sauer River 2194:Rhine River 2050:MaxiMaxiMax 1988:(including 1897:Rhine River 1643:Place_names 1603:Halys River 1539:MaxiMaxiMax 1535:Mississippi 1491:MaxiMaxiMax 1473:", like at 1460:MaxiMaxiMax 1456:MaxiMaxiMax 1431:MaxiMaxiMax 1427:MaxiMaxiMax 1016:Volga, Iowa 1004:Volga River 925:Qazan river 917:Qazan River 894:Qaxan river 886:Qaxan River 602:User:Tuomas 581:User:Ezhiki 577:for others 565:(including 431:(including 404:Rhine River 382:"X (river)" 356:place names 300:in general 3194:Categories 2828:ISO 8859-1 2796:Diacritics 2595:Zala river 2554:Drin River 2540:Spui River 2418:, more at 2263:Luxembourg 2217:Saar River 2186:Luxembourg 2106:"X" alone? 1819:Rio Grande 1479:Eschweiler 961:Echternach 779:translated 358:called "X" 318:Rio Grande 223:See also: 3062:USGS GNIS 2832:Markussep 2730:Markussep 2720:"X River" 2716:"X River" 2712:"River X" 2680:Markussep 2672:Markussep 2623:Markussep 2603:Markussep 2512:Rio Negro 2350:Markussep 2253:Moselle, 2172:Moselle, 1979:Walt Pohl 1945:Markussep 1823:Markussep 1815:Syr Darya 1811:Amu River 1807:Amu Darya 1651:Amu Darya 1630:page. -- 1575:Ruhr Area 1524:Markussep 1483:Markussep 1419:Markussep 1357:Markussep 1331:page, at 1307:Markussep 1298:-- Tobias 1296:Amu Darya 1256:over for 973:Markussep 867:Markussep 575:"X river" 571:"X River" 567:"River X" 441:"X River" 437:"X River" 433:"River X" 395:"X river" 367:"River X" 350:"X River" 339:River Cam 333:"River X" 322:Amu Darya 93:if needed 76:Be polite 31:talk page 3066:Rmhermen 3044:Rmhermen 2663:Rmhermen 2641:Rmhermen 2388:Ruhrjung 2371:Rmhermen 2346:Saarland 2340:and the 2319:Ruhrjung 2226:Ruhrjung 2215:and the 2076:Rmhermen 1903:Ruhrjung 1862:Rmhermen 1795:Ruhrjung 1667:Neapolis 1620:Rmhermen 1520:Ob River 1512:Kostroma 1365:Mikkalai 1341:Mikkalai 1335:, or at 1268:Ruhrjung 1264:instead. 1169:Rmhermen 1065:Rmhermen 1028:Rmhermen 996:Rmhermen 988:Mikkalai 952:Mikkalai 597:User:Joy 544:Mikkalai 61:get help 2615:Conradi 2407:LaSaar 2334:Meurthe 2330:Moselle 2282:Meurthe 2275:Koblenz 2267:Germany 2201:Koblenz 2190:Germany 2117:llywrch 1994:X River 1990:River X 1970:llywrch 1932:llywrch 1886:llywrch 1785:llywrch 1760:llywrch 1754:"Rio"). 1750:river). 1632:llywrch 1611:llywrch 1258:River X 1254:X River 1083:English 876:editors 533:Germany 507:llywrch 373:X River 2959:, and 2897:(Talk) 2851:(Talk) 2817:(Talk) 2759:(Talk) 2693:(Talk) 2651:(Talk) 2634:(Talk) 2612:Tobias 2566:-: --> 2552:-: --> 2538:-: --> 2426:(Talk) 2402:LaSaar 2306:like. 2279:rivers 2259:France 2255:German 2251:French 2182:France 2174:German 2170:French 2045:Danube 2020:Danube 1953:Tuomas 1683:oblast 1679:wilaya 1663:Naples 1508:Moskva 1475:London 1353:Irtysh 1244:Vuoksi 905:Quaxan 402:(e.g. 337:(e.g. 316:(e.g. 302:(e.g. 296:plain 265:(e.g. 234:Naming 196:Rivers 187:Rivers 146:Rivers 123:scale. 3100:Tomer 3078:Tomer 3026:Tomer 2999:Tomer 2981:Tomer 2498:Weser 2484:Wümme 2385:: --> 2367:river 2338:Ruwer 2290:Ruwer 2286:Sauer 2197:river 2178:river 2032:wiser 2024:older 1882:river 1813:(and 1725::-) 1590:title 1329:River 1321:River 1047:into 984:Rhine 937:lakes 921:Qazan 890:Qaxan 308:Rhine 115:This 89:Seek 37:page. 16:< 3074:knew 3037:and 3014:and 2971:and 2925:Stan 2871:Stan 2802:Stan 2704:2(3) 2702:use 2359:Stan 2342:Saar 2332:and 2294:Saar 2292:and 2265:and 2188:and 2164:The 2125:Stan 2113:very 2041:Nile 2016:Nile 1870:Stan 1853:Stan 1817:and 1715:Stan 1671:Stan 1665:not 1583:Stan 1567:Stan 1514:and 1088:Stan 1039:can 1008:Iowa 980:Nile 845:Joy 813:some 803:Joy 757:Joy 714:Joy 712:. -- 710:Sana 694:Joy 664:Joy 647:Joy 636:Stan 623:Joy 559:2(4) 557:use 425:2(3) 423:use 376:own. 304:Nile 269:vs. 227:and 78:and 3170:Tom 3147:Tom 3145:. 3123:Tom 3024:? 2708:"X" 2304:not 2273:at 2199:at 2043:or 2018:or 1999:and 1809:to 1780:had 1707:not 1700:but 1579:Aar 1531:USA 1477:or 1443:you 1355:). 1006:in 674:him 563:"X" 429:"X" 298:"X" 3196:: 3168:. 3072:I 2955:, 2951:, 2714:, 2597:, 2562:- 2548:- 2534:- 2524:→ 2520:: 2510:→ 2506:: 2496:→ 2492:: 2482:→ 2478:: 2468:→ 2464:: 2386:-- 2288:, 2284:, 2261:, 2224:-- 2211:, 2207:, 2184:, 2097:is 1901:-- 1516:Ob 1510:, 1316:: 982:, 935:, 927:, 923:, 919:, 915:, 911:, 907:, 903:, 896:, 892:, 888:, 692:-- 569:, 435:, 320:, 306:, 59:; 3178:r 3174:e 3155:r 3151:e 3131:r 3127:e 2455:) 2442:: 2296:. 2249:( 2219:. 2168:( 2028:≠ 1986:X 1783:- 1262:X 1192:. 408:. 341:) 324:) 310:) 273:) 129:: 63:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge

talk:WikiProject Rivers/Naming - Knowledge

Index