A fact from Muncy Creek appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 7 August 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that the discharge of Muncy Creek at Muncy can be a thousand times higher than the average discharge of the creek at Sonestown?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania 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.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
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
Be consistent with the use of conversions, e.g. you convert everything the infobox but not later, e.g. in the Hydrology and Watershed sections which are mix-and-match, etc etc.
Use the {{convert}} template to give sensible results, i.e. "(690 to 690 m)" is not helpful at all.
"a short distance" and "Shortly afterwards" and "receiving very short tributaries" - these aren't quantified in any way, what is "short" in this context?
"by scalloped hills." scalloped is badly linked, do you mean scallop-shaped?
You have a Course section but then I see "Muncy Creek's course winds significantly, but flows generally southwest.[11]" in the Geography section. Is there an unnecessary overlap here?
Generally a lot of work could go into making it more readable and less like a disparate set of bullet point facts. For criteria fails, right now I'm seeing problems with 1a, 1b and 3b, as detailed above.
