Talk:Ciénega

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Ecology Low‑importance

	Ecology portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Ecology, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve ecology-related articles.EcologyWikipedia:WikiProject EcologyTemplate:WikiProject EcologyEcology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Geography Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography 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.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

Ecoregions Low‑importance

	This article is supported by WikiProject Ecoregions, a collaborative effort to help develop and improve Wikipedia's coverage of ecoregions. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on these topics. See WikiProject Ecoregions and Wikipedia:FAQ/Contributing.EcoregionsWikipedia:WikiProject EcoregionsTemplate:WikiProject EcoregionsEcoregions articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Help, Please

How can I change the title of the article to have an acute accent over the first "e" in Cienega? This is the proper accent, whether cienega is spelled "cienega" or "cienaga." Editorsproof (talk) 13:34, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done already!--Dthomsen8 (talk) 01:01, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple Issues Template added

Hi Wikipedians,

I've added a Multiple Issues template to the top of the article. While this article contains much good information, it is overly long and detailed and verges on a non-encyclopedic tone at points. Specifically:

1. The whole article, but especially the "Importance," "Causes of Deterioration," and "Development" sections, read like a book rather than a concise encyclopedia entry. For example: "A long-forgotten indication that there used to be far more water in the Southwest and suggesting there were more ciénagas here than we'll ever know is the sumidero. The word in standard Spanish means “a sewer, drain or gutter,” but to early settlers and ranchers it meant “a mask well or sinkhole.”[11] They were dangerous, 10 to 20 feet across, deep, spring-like traps that showed up unexpectedly on plains..." This is excessively-detailed, written in nonencyclopedic language, and of questionable relevance (especially since the entire passage seems to rely on a single reference, which is a dictionary of regional language and vocabulary).

2. There are far too many direct quotations (and excessively long quotations) that could easily be summarized with no loss of information, and many are irrelevant. For example: The entire block quotation at the top of the "Future" section is needlessly long and only very loosely relevant, since it's just describing the effects of climate change on the American West very generally; it contains nothing about cienegas or any other particular type of habitat or geographic feature.

3. The article is just too long and too detailed. It could probably be cut in half with no loss of information.

4. The article contains too many lists of interesting but unnecessary detail. For example: it is not standard on WP to include a list of regional variations in the pronunciation of the topic (unless that's somehow relevant to its notability). I also personally think the timeline of events happening under "Development" is completely unnecessary and probably too specialist for this article.

I will get to work on cleaning up this article and would appreciate any feedback or help! WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 03:38, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On top of that, I've found that reference 2 is nonexistent and references 3 and 4, which I haven't been able to track down yet, appear to be simply a travelogue and a geographic dictionary, not sources where you'd expect to find detailed geological descriptions of cienegas as in the section citing these sources. I really have my work cut out for me. But in the meantime I've also added a check-citation template to the relevant section, which may have to be completely deleted (without suitable references it's all WP:OR) until I can get it fixed. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 19:30, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I just made my first effort at cleaning up this flaming train wreck of an article. Created the "Properties" section which merged the two previously-existing sections, removed their (totally irrelevant) references and added two good references. Next, I will get to work on the three sections below that (Recognition, Importance, and Causes of Deterioration). Also, I might have to remove the gallery under "Current State". It's a nice collection, but without better referencing it's OR. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 21:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just cut probably 75% of the article, removing the poorly-sourced and repetitive sections and condensing all of the key verifiable points into a new "Importance and Conservation" section. The "development" section contained some information not included in this latest version, but that section was far too technical for general readers and did not contain sufficient citations (but most of the relevant information can be found in reference 2 and references therein). I now think this article is cleaned up enough to remove the Multiple Issues template. The "current state" section seems like OR but I will leave the photos and the section in place for now. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 23:48, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to edit "see also" content?

Well, I don't see a way to add a screen grab of exactly what I'm referring to, so I'll be as concise as possible: Under the "See Also" header, the text that follows the hyperlinked topic "Oasis" has a definite grammar booboo. It says, "A fertile area in a deserted in a desert environment" - OOPSIE!

My suggestion for rewording - "A fertile area in a desert or semi-desert environment", which is pretty much verbatim from the Wiki entry for Oasis.

My apologies for not knowing how to fix this, but all respect to the Wikiboos that are smarter than I 😁

Have a safe, healthy and loved moment today and every day 🥰

Respectfully, P.V. PurVirgo (talk) 18:47, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]