Talk:Ford (crossing)

2004 page move

Almost every link to this page refers to the Ford Motor Company. I don't look forward to trying to change all the links. I propose moving this page to something like Ford (stream) and changing the few pages that refer to this topic. Then this page can be made a redirect to Ford Motor Company. I know I created this page but I don't remember why. Would anyone oppose this move? Rmhermen 17:26, Jun 10, 2004 (UTC)

I feel that the failure by some editors to use "Ford Motor Company" shouldn't really be condoned by over-riding the use of Ford for the one purpose (especially as it a business name and an abbreviation so somewhat US-centric). Arguably though the current content should move and ford become the primary disambig page rather than the current follow-me routing. --VampWillow 21:14, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I'd like to see this moved to something like Ford (stream). I really don't like these dictionary definitions (Wikipedia is not a dictionary), but I don't think it needs to be deleted. --Nate Silva 23:49, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

"Dean" Ford link

I want to consider removing the "Dean" Ford link as it leads to a dismabiguation page which doesn't appear to have an entry for Dean Ford. Or should it be on that page but isn't? Tenorcnj 17:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Other picture

I find this picture of Brockenhurst not very 'characteristic' for a ford, since "A ford is a place in a watercourse (most commonly a stream or river)" (so tells the article), not just a river that has temporarily flooded and has caused some pools, as seems to be the case on the image. So if anyone has a good image, please replace the current picture! Or if you agree, at least remove this picture. Anoko moonlight (talk) 02:06, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Although the picture shows Brockenhurst ford being about two feet deep after heavy rain, it's still a "proper" ford - there's always some water in it. Mr Larrington (talk) 12:04, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Primary meaning - move to Ford

Since it is clear that this is the primary dictionary meaning of the word, it is recommended that this article is moved to Ford over its existing redirect. However this requires an admin. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:29, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Schweinfurt definition is wrong

The name Schweinfurt is not where the pigs cross the river -- that's a folk etymology unrelated to the truth. It comes from the old word "schwinne", meaning diminishing. Beyond that point, opportunities to ford are few. 138.162.128.53 (talk) 17:52, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

"According to Wolf-Armin von Reitzenstein, not the swine, but Swin gave the city its name. The word probably does not originate from Old High German, but was brought by the Franks from their original areas around the Meuse and Scheldt. In Dutch, Zwin [zʋin] refers to a tidal creek, a watercourse in mudflats and marshes. Swin means decrease (shrinking) in the true sense of the word and in this context refers to the shallow water of a ford. The word was also in use in Old Saxon, which is indicated by several places called Swinford in the British Isles, as well as Swinemünde on the Swine." https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schweinfurt#Namensbildung — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:B00:4776:90A5:610F:30FE:103A (talk) 01:16, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

"Ford"

The use of "Ford" is under discussion, see Talk:Ford (disambiguation)#Requested move 26 August 2018. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:06, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

There is now a proposal at Talk:Fords#Requested move 10 May 2019 to make this article primary for the plural. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:53, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Noting that consensus there was to not move. Klbrain (talk) 13:22, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Resolved

Merge proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To not merge, on the grounds that these are distinct topics worthy of separate coverage. Klbrain (talk) 17:07, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

---

Floodway (road) seems to be a synonym, so I support the June proposal to merge that article here. Klbrain (talk) 13:23, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

They're not really the same thing. A ford is a shallow section of a river or stream that can be used as a crossing, while a floodway is a section of road that is generally dry, but may become submerged during flood events (and is designed to withstand the flooding). - Evad37 [talk] 14:29, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

There seems to be confusion as to the definition of a "floodway" -- or at least when viewed from the U.S. version of English. In other words, the word floodway has nothing to do with roads or use as a crossing for vehicles. Instead, it is a way for floodwaters to distribute across the land. As per the definition from FEMA (an organization that knows a thing or two about flooding), "floodway" -- a: "river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than a designated height." (See here).

The word "floodway" is also described in the article Floodplain in detail: "Where a detailed study of a waterway has been done, the 100-year floodplain will also include the floodway, the critical portion of the floodplain which includes the stream channel and any adjacent areas that must be kept free of encroachments that might block flood flows or restrict storage of flood waters"

It seems the Floodway (road) article includes examples from Australia. Perhaps this is a variant used to describe what is a ford in UK and US usage? If so, then that should be noted in the "road" article, not in this "crossing" article. In any case, I do not support the merger proposal. Cheers, CZmarlin (talk) 19:28, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

It is more similar to, or a variation of, a causeway rather than a ford. And yes, the term floodway may refer to different things, hence the "(road)" disambiguation. (And I also oppose the proposed merge, in case that wasn't obvious.) - Evad37 [talk] 03:51, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

A ford (crossing) and a floodway are different things. A ford is wet normally / at most times / frequently, whereas a floodway is normally dry and only wet infrequently / after heavy rain / seasonal times. I, therefore, oppose the merge. Dbrooker — Preceding undated comment added 15:12, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

@Klbrain and also merge proposer SYSS Mouse: Do you have any further comments? - Evad37 [talk] 00:22, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. I see the difference now Floodway (road) sign as an Australian (seemingly exclusively) use for what in the UK would be signed with Road liable to flooding. I'm still not entirely convinced about the similarity to causeway though, as I think that that Australian causeway use might be rather Australian-specific too, in part because watercourse in those references doesn't seem to mean a permanent waterway. I note Evad37 editing on the lede on Floodway (road), at the time of the comments made above in December, and think that they're reasonable and consistent with those Australian sources. It would be great to internationalize the Floodway (road) article though, as all the references are Australian; is road flooding not a notable problem elsewhere? Alternatively, the lede could designate this as a uniquely Australian concept or construction in a land of flooding rains? Anyway, happy to switch to oppose merge. [Happy to declare that I was born in Australia, but live in the UK] Klbrain (talk) 01:46, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Oppose merge - as per others, these two are different things a ford is a mostly wet crossing and a floodway is a mostly dry roadway, let's not mix these up. Jokulhlaup (talk) 16:17, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.