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
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium 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.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related articles
I am aware there is a theory that the Scheldt once joined into the Maas delta, but we are not even mentioning it?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 10:44, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a theory, but the truth, in the sense that the river Striene (not existing anymore) linked the Schelde and the Maas in the Middle Ages. If you want to know more do a Google Translate on this link (Leenders, 1999). Best regards JRB-Europe (talk) 15:57, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Theory or not, it is not even mentioned in the article, and it seems most sources the article cite are about the modern delta which does not have this link.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 11:15, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There is a history section in this article, where it could be mentioned, but this section currently only mentions Roman times around the year zero A.D., which is rather arbitrary. Also the second paragraph of the geography section mentions the situation before 1421 and the rather small change of 1904, which is still arbitrary, because there have been many important changes on several timescales in the delta that are not mentioned. One also need to decide if this article is primarily about the current situation or about the current situation including the history of it. In an ideal world a good description of the history of the geology/geography of the delta and in the last two/three thousand years the interaction between human influence and its geology/geography would be massive, probably in wikipedia requiring a separate article. JRB-Europe (talk) 12:25, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well at least there should be mention of something mentioned in the title though? And if the article is about the modern delta I did not find many references to the delta with the name Wikipedia is using?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:23, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In the Netherlands we normally speak about "the delta", but it's obvious that on wikipedia we need a more precise name, since there are more important delta's in the world. The current articlename is not so bad, since it's indeed a delta of the three rivers mentioned in the name, even if this name is not much used outside of wikipedia. JRB-Europe (talk) 17:09, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
