Talk:River delta

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

please will you get more info cause i need to do a report on a landfoem and then i picked delta but i can't find much info on it or real helpful info case i need to know how it looks how it helps and doesn't help people.

                                                             Thanx
                                                                Jennifer

Contents

[edit] Images

Image:Ganges River Delta, Bangladesh, India.jpg was added to the article today. I had felt the article already had its maximum number of images relative to the size of text. Nonetheless, I was hoping to add Image:Mississippi Delta Lobes.jpg, because it demonsrates something of an opposite of the Nile delta... eg. one that has more deltaic switching. Would anyone else be in favor of adding it in place of the Ganges image? --Interiot 17:18, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

If your point is the one I think it is, the picture would be a constructive addition and might reasonably oust the Ganges picture. This last is not as informative as it might be. (RJP 22:00, 14 January 2006 (UTC))


Could someone please tell me what the suggested picture actually shows and/or means? --—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.147.38 (talkcontribs)

While I don't know for sure what Interiot had in mind, there r two sorts of delta; the one epitomized by the Nile, in which the river breaks up into diverging streams in a broadly triangular plan - like the Greek capital letter Δ. The other sort is typified by the Mississippi. The river retains a main channel enclosed by levees, and has extended seawards. The levees leak relatively small streams into the sea along the adjoining coast but the silt in the main channel has allowed the levees to grow out into the sea to near the edge of the continental shelf.
There is no fundamental difference but the Mississippi delta is an example at the latter extreme. (RJP 18:04, 21 January 2006 (UTC))


Delta lobe switching in the Mississippi Delta,  4600 yrs BP,  3500 yrs BP,  2800 yrs BP,  1000 yrs BP,  300 yrs BP,  500 yrs BP,  current
Delta lobe switching in the Mississippi Delta, 4600 yrs BP, 3500 yrs BP, 2800 yrs BP, 1000 yrs BP, 300 yrs BP, 500 yrs BP, current
If it's put in the article, some sort of explanation or legend would be good, attached is one possibility. The image shows how the main channel has switched directions every couple thousand years, due to the reasons RJP described, and how it builds up the majority of its deposits in first one lobe, then another... --Interiot 21:21, 21 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Proposed merger with Outfall

This seems a strange idea. The two have very little in common. It is true that a River delta could be called an outfall but so could an Estuary. It is clear that the Outfall article, though still short, is developing away from any connection with a natural river mouth. (RJP 22:00, 14 January 2006 (UTC))


I agree with the comment above. Although they are related with each other, they are connected very loosely. Why would anyone want to merge them anyway? --—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.147.38 (talkcontribs)

I also agree that it shouldn't be merged, since, for instance, river delta shouldn't be merged with estuary. --Interiot 21:21, 21 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Confused

I found this article a little confusing. Right at the start it states that a delta is a triangular land formation. If you look at the examples or read the discusion it becomes clear that there are two types of river delta, one charachterised by the delta shape and one more like the Mississippi. I am still not clear what kind of river delta the mississppi is but the article doesn't really warn me that there is a distinction. Furthermore the first paragraph directs me to estuaries where I learn that river deltas and liman form towards non tidal seas but the list of deltas here includes some that flow into tidal seas (I think anyway the gangees flows into the indian ocean which is tidal as far as I know). I am in no way a geographer and am really not confident to alter the article, I expect my understanding is flawed.Aach 11:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Amazon does not have a delta

I removed the Amazon as one of the world's notable rivers with a delta as it does not in fact have one. The Amazon enters the Atlantic Ocean in an enormous estuary; it does not show the deposition of sediment and splitting into distributaries characteristic of a delta.

Here is a quote from the article about the Amazon:

'The bore is the reason the Amazon does not have a delta; the ocean rapidly carries away the vast volume of silt carried by the Amazon, making it impossible for a delta to grow. It also has a very large tide sometimes reaching 20 feet.'

Booshank 13:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

The Amazon does have a delta, it is referred to as a "subaqueous" Delta, because it is submerged under the water surface. See, for example:

Measurements in the bottom boundary layer on the Amazon subaqueous delta Cacchione, DA; Drake, DE; Kayen, RW; Sternberg, RW; Kineke, GC; Tate, GB Marine Geology [MAR. GEOL.]. Vol. 125, no. 3-4, pp. 235-257. 1995.

[edit] types of deltas

Bold text i need the differntbtypes of deltas along with diagrams, for my geography home work. can i get some help?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.252.26.43 (talk) 18:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Similarity with Alluvial fan

Can anyone tell me what the difference between a River delta and Alluvial fan is? If there is not a difference then perhaps the two articles should be merged? --Daleh T 07:51, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] not enough information about the delta

Delta top channels Mid-channel bars Selective transport of different grain sizes Channel switching (avulsion) Channel bank erosion Creation of floodplain terraces

[edit] this article does not contain enough information

i found the main overview of the article a little confusing. i would have appreciated it a lot more if i got a good overview of what a delta is (which is all i am looking for) by simply reading a well phrased few sentences. the above is not mention much at all.

personally i would have expected the above list to be clearly mentioned in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.215.57.41 (talk) 13:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)