User talk:Wncoutdoors
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Edit to Whitewater Falls
Wncoutdoors: With respect to your edit to Whitewater Falls, I understand the distinction that you are making between Whitewater Falls and Crabtree Falls based upon visible drop. Can the same be said with respect to the other three waterfalls that are taller than Whitewater Falls? In other words, the visibile portion of any one of the following three waterfalls could be taller than the visible portion of Whitewater Falls.
- Amicalola Falls, Georgia - 222 m (729 ft)
- Cascade Falls, Georgia - 183 m (600 ft) cascade with 3 drops, the tallest of which is 80 m (262 ft).
- Cochrans Falls, Georgia - 183 m (600 ft) cascade.
I honestly don't know the answer to this question, so I have marked your statement in Whitewater Falls as one that needs a supporting citation.--Tlmclain | Talk 21:06, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- Good point. It was a mostly mindless edit. I remember reading that somewhere, but I can't remember where or when. Hopefully I or someone else can find it again and cite it properly. The reason I believe it to be true is that Whitewater Falls is on a larger stream than the others, which means there is no tree canopy over it, which means it's easily visible from a distant location, year-round, and you can (while standing in one spot) see the entire falls, top to bottom. This is clearly not true of the waterfalls you mentioned based on theier photographs. They look like a series of cascades rather than one "waterfall" per se. At any given point, you can't see the entire "falls". In fact, under those criteria, I can think of some streams in Western NC that are a near continuous drop or series of drops for easily 1000 vertical feet or greater. But I wouldn't call them a "waterfall".
- At any rate, waterfall "height" is somewhat subjective and it's hard to avoid weasel words when talking about them. Wncoutdoors 16:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- Wncoutdoors: I very much agree with your observations about waterfalls in general, particularly when it comes to cascading waterfalls, which are sometimes just a steep streambed. I also have seen people get all tied up with a distinction between highest and tallest. With respect to the waterfalls in question, all I have done is look at photos and really have no idea which waterfall can claim the tallest "visible" drop. By the way, someone marked your entry Cullasaja falls as unsourced, so I spent a little time on the article - I hope I didn't mess it up.--Tlmclain | Talk 18:12, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Oh! Did I actually save that? I have to stop editing while I'm midless at work. Looks good! Wncoutdoors 18:34, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I've corrected the Whitewater Falls page and basically included information about the eternal "height" argument. 5minutes 12:55, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Waterfalls in General
I see you've posted some more waterfalls. Thanks! I've been working on trying to get as many of North Carolina's waterfalls a) listed; and b) brought into the format and template of the Waterfall WikiProject. I appreciate your help and look forward to working with you more in the future.
At some point, I'd love to get an article together on Waterfalls of North Carolina. Probably couldn't be as good or informative as Rich's site or Kevin's book, but dangit: we've got tons of them here, and it's a shame that so few people know. Again, thanks! 5minutes 12:55, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
I'll keep adding info about the ones I know. Can't speak for the templates though...I have enough languages to learn, and WikiMarkup seems to be one of the more annoying ones so I stay away from it and stick in mainly just text.
- That's cool! I'll try and go back to add the template info. Do you have any photos that you'd be willing to upload? I've not been able to make it to the mountains much this year. 5minutes 01:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)