Meta:Manual of Style

If you're interested in contributing to the wiki, the Manual of Style is the place to go. This article covers the format and style required for articles on this wiki. ''This page is currently incomplete and a work in progress. It may need to be divided into several sub-pages in future.''

Is an article appropriate?
Before writing an article, it is important to ask whether an article is appropriate for the subject in question.


 * Rivers are what this wiki is about, so practically anything from a small stream to the Amazon is fair game as long as it is a natural or semi-natural watercourse. However, there is a limit to the size of the smallest streams which merit inclusion; for instance, it would be silly to write about a tiny 20-metre-long drainage ditch. As such, streams which do not appear on a water network map of or near 1:15,000 to 1:30,000 scale should not have an article devoted to them. For European Rivers, a relevant water network map would be Copernicus EU Hyrdro, which is available here and can be used in a GIS program. For more information on using a GIS in the wiki, see Meta:Using GIS.
 * Other river features...
 * Lakes, whilst generally beyond the scope of this wiki, may be a good topic for an article provided they are online lakes (rivers flow through them, to them or from them). Lakes which are not directly connected to a river, regardless of whether they may be fed by groundwater flow, should not be the subject of an article.
 * Estuaries are welcome additions to the wiki provided they are characteristically distinguishable from their associated river, or if they can be otherwise justified as notable by the content of their article. Deltas are always worthy of inclusion. Note: regardless of whether an estuary or delta has its own article, it should still be described in the Course section of the associated river page.
 * Waterfalls are also relevant to the wiki and are therefore a good topic for an article.
 * Drainage basins (including endorheic basins) are another main topic of the wiki and very much worthy of their own articles, though their inclusion should be limited to first-order drainage basins (those draining to an estuary or otherwise directly connected to the sea/centre of drainage) and not sub-catchments.
 * Canals should not be the subject of an article unless they act as de facto tributaries of existing rivers (without crossing other catchments). The same applies to navigation channels, drainage channels and other artificial distributaries which cross actual rivers via aqueducts.
 * Conceptual articles about the above and other hydrological principles are good topics for an article but will likely have been already written. Please make sure that what you intend to write about has not been written already.

Naming an article
It is also important to give an article an appropriate name. This is an English-language wiki, so an article about a river, drainage basin, or river feature should be titled by its English name if it has one.

To "River" or not to "River"?
It is generally encouraged on this wiki to omit the word "river" from the title if it has been added colloquially. For instance, an article about the Ganges should be titled "Ganges" rather than "Ganges River"; an article about the Seine should be titled the "Seine" rather than the "River Seine". This helps keep the wiki consistent in the face of inconsistent naming conventions. The exception to this rule is in the case of rivers named by a simple descriptor (such as a colour); for instance, the Red River should retain "River" in the article title, as otherwise the wiki would be populated with ambigious single-verb-titled articles and it wouldn't be clear what they're referring to.

Please be careful not to apply this rule to smaller watercourses such as those referred to in the name as "streams", "brooks", "creeks" etc. This is for the following reasons:


 * They are less likely to be notable enough to be recognisable sans a prefix or suffix.
 * They are often named after a person or place anyway, so to omit that prefix or suffix from the title would look weird.
 * There are likely to be many other streams with a similar or identical proper name but a different prefix or suffix. This helps to reduce the length of and disambiguation pages.

The proper name conundrum
We've covered the first stage (whether to include the word "River" in the title), but the second is more complex still. Many streams and rivers have multiple proper names either throughout their length or for different streches. It is important to choose the name which is most appropriate and recognisable. Ask yourself the following questions:


 * 1) Is the name of the river in English? This is an English wiki, so the title of the article should reflect the common name of the watercourse among English-speaking people. This does not mean that the name should be anglicized if the common name of the river is not in English (for instance, an article about the Rio Negro should not be titled the "Black River").
 * 2) Do multiple everal names apply to the whole length of the river? In this case, it is best to choose the name which is most often applied in common parlence. For example, the Thames is also known in parts as the "Isis", however the former is clearly the more common name and is therefore more appropriate for the article title. If this isn't clear for the river in question, consider the next step.
 * 3) Is the river referred to by different names along different sections? In this case, it's best to choose the name which applies furthest downstream since this is likely to be where the river is at its largest and most significant. For instance, the Ure in England changes its name to the Ouse as it approaches the city of York, and it is this downstream name that should be selected (it also happens to be the more well-known od the two). Exceptions to this rule are as follows:
 * 4) If the downstream name applies to a disproportionately short stretch of the river relative to the upstream name
 * 5) If the downstream name is exceptionally common (e.g. "The Fleet") or is otherwise clearly referring to a reach of the river rather than the river itself
 * 6) If the upstream name is clearly the more well-known
 * 7) Could they be different rivers? If a name change occurs at the confluence of a major tributary, consider that the two may be in fact seperate rivers worthy of seperate articles. For instance, the Tigris and Euphrates combine to form the Shatt al-Arab south of Al Qurnah. It would be wrong to try to lump one of the two in with the other when there are in fact three seperate rivers.

Many rivers have multiple names - a fact which complicates the article naming process somewhat. It is best to apply the following rationale to select the most appropriate one:


 * 1) Choose the name which is most often applied to the watercourse in common knowledge.
 * 2) Example: The River Thames is also known as the River Isis, however it is referred to by the former much more often than the latter both within the UK and around the world.
 * 3) If the more common name of the watercourse is not known or is otherwise ambiguous, choose the name which is furthest downstream.
 * 4) Example: The River Gipping changes to the River Orwell as it approaches the sea and its common estuary with the River Stour.
 * 5) Exception 1: If the downstream name applies to a short stretch of the river relative to the upstream name, especially if the downstream name does not include "river" in the title and the upstream one does, or otherwise includes "reach" or "channel" in the title, implying that that particular name is only used to refer to a tidal stretch of a larger river.
 * 6) Exception 2: If the downstream name is exceptionally common (such as "The Creek", "New Cut", "The Fleet", etc.).
 * 7) If the above remains unresolved, choose the name which applies to the longest stretch of the watercourse (especially if the name in question applies to the vast majority of it).
 * 8) Example: The lowest stretch of the River Witham is referred to as "The Haven", but it is clear that the latter applies to a comparatively short stretch near its estuary.
 * 9) If the above remains unresolved, then it may be acceptable to choose the name which is less common in order to avoid a bracketed page title (as detailed below). However, if the more common name is also the name by which the river is more often referred to, then the less common name should not be selected.
 * 10) Example: The River Ouse in Yorkshire, England has a relatively common name, but is referred to as the River Ure, a more unique name, further upstream. However, because it is commonly understood to be called the "River Ouse" and less so as the "River Ure", the page title must take the former name and not the latter.

By following the rationale above, or by chance for rivers with one name only, it is possible that you will stumble across an article with the same title as yours which is about a different river with the same name. If this is the case, then the page name will need to be altered to avoid conflicts. There are two solutions to this depending on the nature of the river:


 * 1) The river's name is appended with the name of its parent stream (e.g. River Dove (Waveney tributary)), as will be the case for most watercourses sharing the same name.
 * 2) The river's name is appended with the general location of the river at an appropriate scale (e.g. River Bylth (Suffolk)). This applies when the river in question is a principal river and therefore has no parent streams to declare it as a tributary of. For most British rivers, the river's county is an appropriate scale to distinguish rivers with naming conflicts as they are generally small on a global scale. Regional or national disambiguations may be necessary for larger rivers.

In both cases, the creation of a disambiguation page will be necessary so that readers can navigate to the correct article.

Articles about drainage basins
For articles about drainage basins, similar principles apply, though the name of the drainage basin will be partly dictated by the chosen name(s) of the principal river(s) which occupy it.

Pages about specific rivers
Pages about specific rivers should be formatted as follows.

Disambiguation
If the river in question shares a name with another, or has a similar name to another either in spelling or pronunciation (in English), then a disambiguation should be provided at the very top of the page. The section should be formatted in italics, and should link to an appropriate disambiguation page. An example follows: For more rivers known as the Blyth, see River Blyth (disambiguation). Not to be confused with the River Blythe or the River Blithe. The first sentence of the disambiguation is necessary because the river in question shares its name with others. The second sentence is necessary because the river shares a similar spelling or pronunciation with others. One or both of these sections may be unnecessary, depending on the name of river you are writing about.

Introductory paragraph
For an article about a specific river, it is important first to introduce the watercourse in a short paragraph (although the length of this can vary according to the significance of the river in question). The name of the river (and of the page) should first be stated in bold, as should any alternative names, followed by a description of the location of the river at an appropriate scale. Regardless of the scale, however, the country or countries through which the river flows should always be identified, as should the river's associated drainage basin if the river is a principal river. Additional information about a river's basic course can be included if it is relevant, as can any important facts. An example introduction follows: The River Great Stour, also known as the River Stour (below Stourmouth), is a river in the English county of Kent and principal river of the Great Stour Basin. It flows from the North Downs near the town of Ashford to its estuary at Pegwell Bay, south of Thanet.