Talk:Madawaska River

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Just a thought, but I think this disambiguation page should be placed as the primary Madawaska River entry. The tributary of the Ottawa River, in keeping with the "Madawaska River(Saint John)" precedent, could be renamed "Madawaska River(Ottawa)" and the "Little Madawaska River" should be renamed to "Madawaska River(Aroostook)".

This change would follow the St. Croix River main article which is a disambiguation page, pointing to sub-articles.

Also, in searching US Geological Survey maps, I have only found a "Madawaska River" and not a "Little Madawaska River" in Aroostook County, Maine. This leads me to believe that the term "Little" is a local nickname added? Cheers,Plasma east 20:45, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was no consensus. --liquidGhoul 23:54, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

Madawaska River (disambiguation) → Madawaska River – Is there anything that makes the Ontario Madawaska River inherently more notable than the New Brunswick/Quebec one? I have already moved Madawaska River to Madawaska River (Ontario). Kirjtc2 16:07, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

Oppose. The Madawaska River in Quebec-New Brunswick is only 35 km long, and the one in Ontario is 230 km long. --Usgnus 21:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what length has to do with it. Not many people in this part of the country know that there's one in Ontario (I forgot til I saw the article yesterday), and I'm sure the reverse is true there. Kirjtc2 11:41, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The longer a river, the more likely it is encountered, the more likely it is wider and has more bridges crossing it. Compare with Mackenzie River and Mackenzie River, New Zealand. I'm sure many people in New Zealand have never heard of the one in Canada. --Usgnus 16:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Add any additional comments

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.