Talk:Finger Lakes
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Added subcaptions to mark the two extant parts of this article. Tmesipt 2.7.04
Contents |
[edit] Drainage
I think the 4 lakes west of Canandaigua Lake are in a separate drainage basin emptying directly north into Lake Ontario (just west of Rochester NY). The other lakes drain into the Seneca River, which flows east, then (just past Syracuse NY) turns north joining with Oneida River(<Lake Oneida) to form Oswego River emptying into Lake Ontario. All of this is perhaps complicated by the 'overlay' of the Erie /New York Barge Canal System. I have to go 'play in the sandbox' before attempting to edit the main article myself, but I do think the drainage of these lakes is important information.
Source: Earthtrends>Watersheds of the World>St.Lawrence Watershed - Lake Ontario subbasin.
[edit] Onondaga Lake
Wouldn't Onondaga Lake be considered at least a minor Finger Lake? I mean if Oneida might be, then Onondaga really should, as it has the same "finger form" as the main finger lakes. newkai 19:13, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
- Certainly. It's just been overlooked. Pollinator 19:41, May 7, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] History
The history section could use something -- anything -- on the Iroquois. After all, the lakes are named after them. I'll add info when I get a chance. Pfly 19:24, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- Took me a while, but I've added something on the Iroquois history. Also removed the claim of "largest land purchase in the world to that date" for the Phelps and Gorham Purchase of 1790. I almost just put in a "citation needed", but really I can think of many larger purchases off the top of my head. Plenty of wars ended with large tracts of land being transfered from one power to another with some monetary compensation. Remember the "purchases" of central and western New York were directly tied to cession treaties by the Iroquois. Rather than simple purchases, they were lands ceded after defeat in war. There are plenty of examples of much larger tracts of land being "purchased" in this way before 1790. Pfly 18:52, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Illustrations
What is the problem with large images? I have taken the time (not inconsiderable) to reformat the page, as I had done it previously, returning larger illustrations. What is the merit of reducing the size, as recently done by some editor? I have been logging much time developing many articles, but will cease if, for no apparent reason, others find them objectionable. Phmalo 18:50, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
According to the Wikipedia Picture Tutorial: "In general, overly large pictures should not be put into articles. Most pictures are between 100 and 400 pixels wide. Generally, pictures should not be wider than that." I resized the photographs to make the page easier to load, and make the images fit into the article better. Also, the entire image can still be seen when a user clicks on the thumbnail. Scarlett Lily 00:33, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
When an article has long lists, forming a narrow column at the edge of the page, a large empty space appears at the right. This was the case here, for instance, with the list of Finger Lakes. That was the impetus to use a large photo here, simply to fill the space. Similarly, when the outline of contents appears in a small box, a large empty space appears along side it, which was why the first pic, the view from space of the Finger Lakes, was enlarged. Furthermore, because of the detail, the larger image means much more to viewers when enlarged. Typically, articles that have many references and links at the bottom have large empty spaces to the right of the columns, which is why the final photo was chosen (a vertical format) and used at this particular size. The ramaining images were enlarged for consistency. Please let the format stant as returned. Phmalo 13:34, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Phrasing
Is there a reason why the lakes are all called "So and So" Lake, as opposed to Lake "So and So". It seems like the later form is more common throughout the rest of the country. Is it just an Upstate New York thing? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.208.128.199 (talk) 20:33, 7 March 2007 (UTC).