Talk:Thomas Creek (Oregon)

Oregon Low‑importance

	Oregon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

Rivers Low‑importance

	Geography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Identity crisis

Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

It seems this article is neither fish nor fowl. It's written like a poorly-formed DAB page but has categories about being streams, yet listing things that are not streams. I think this needs some serious cleanup and repeated reversions by zealous WP:OWNers don't appear to be helpful. The Dissident Aggressor 00:04, 21 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Sorry about seeming zealous. Similar articles ran afoul of the DAB style, so it does not attempt to be a disambiguation page, though it serves that purpose partially.

I have asked for comments at WT:ORE#Are_named_collections_of_features_suitable_articles.3F. —EncMstr (talk) 00:16, 21 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Name-calling isn't going to help anything. Sure, this article's (or page's) format is not standard, but that doesn't necessarily make it wrong. Finetooth does appear to have a viable suggestion at WT:ORE. -Pete (talk) 22:11, 21 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Add topic