Talk:Ciénega

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)
 * ✅ already!--Dthomsen8 (talk) 01:01, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)