Talk:Nicaraguan Canal and Development Project/Archives/2015

Proposed new lead section
Hi Eb, Your rewrite of the lead of Nicaragua Canal has definitely made it more punchy and less waffly. I think I was the person who messed it up -- the reason I did it was to indicate that the canal isn't just a "proposed project" but something that's been around for a long time. While your text is definitely a better read, I think it would be useful to indicate right at the beginning that the concept is as much historical as futuristic. Also, I'm thinking that it might be good to move the details of the various proposed routes out of the lead. How about:


 * The Nicaragua Canal is a proposed waterway that would connect the Atlantic and the Pacific oceans through Nicaragua. Such a canal would follow rivers up to Lake Nicaragua, then cut across the isthmus of Rivas to the Pacific.


 * Construction of a canal along this route was proposed in the early colonial era, due to the favourable geography of the area. Plans by the United States to build such a canal were abandoned only in the early 20th century, after the purchase of the French interests in the Panama Canal at a reasonable cost.  Speculation on a new canal continues, however; the steady increase in world shipping, together with the possibility of establishing shorter shipping routes, may make this a viable project.  Alternatively, a railway, or a combined railway and oil pipeline, could be built to link ports on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts.


 * == Route ==


 * Several possible routes have been proposed for a canal in Nicaragua, all making use of Lake Nicaragua, the second largest lake in Latin America. Three routes have been discussed to carry traffic from the Atlantic up to the lake, which is at an elevation of 32 m (105 ft) above sea level:


 * from Bluefields, up the Rio Escondido and then an artificial canal to the lake


 * from Punta Gorda, up the Rio Punta Gorda and then an artificial canal to the lake


 * from San Juan del Norte, up the Rio San Juan -- with improvements and new locks -- to the lake


 * An artificial canal would then be cut across the narrow isthmus of Rivas, whose lowest point is 56 metres (183 ft) above sea level, to reach the Pacific Ocean at San Juan del Sur.

Comments? Johantheghost 12:17, 1 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I am all in favor of this revised lead. I only suggested making the first sentence end in "through Nicaragua, in Central America."  And the second sentence in "up to Lake Nicaragua and then cut across the isthmus of Rivas to reach the Pacific." -- Eb.hoop 04:14, 2 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Cool — done! — Johantheghost 12:51, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

This section can be updated to describe the chosen route. HKND has included the details for the project on their webpage. Meganepatton (talk) 05:20, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Realign this article and Nicaraguan Canal and Development Project article
My first thought was to merge the two articles, this and Nicaraguan Canal and Development Project. Afterall, why have two articles that are essentially about the same on-going construction project?

But looking more closely at this article, I noticed that this is mostly history, going back to Spanish times. That history section I think can stand on is own. We can move the history into a new separate article called the History of the Nicaragua Canal (or some similar name). Then merge the remainder -- the discussion of the route, of the current construction projection, of the controversy and opposition, etc. -- into a rewritten article on Nicaraguan Canal and Development Project, that has been moved and retitled Nicaragua Canal. We would therefore still have two articles -- one on the history of the various canal efforts and one focusing on the current construction project. Thoughts? --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 06:11, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * No comments yet. If there are none, then I will presume that WP:Silence means WP:Consensus and follow through on the plan.--Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 02:03, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

We're gonna need a bigger boat
I'm not sure how to incorporate this information, but this big article that appeared recently in my actual newspaper said some boats are too big for the Panama Canal, and will even be too big when they upgrade it.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  20:04, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Typos, errors, etc.
In reading the article to learn of the proposed canal (thanks to all who have contributed to this entry for their excellent work, by the way), I noticed this sentence at the end of the 3rd paragraph in the history 1825-1909 section. "Civil war in Nicaragua and an invasion by filibuster William Walker intervened to prevent the canal from being completed." That sentence does not make sense to me. But I do not know enough history to begin to fix it. I post here to bring it to the attention of those who actively edit this entry.

Double reference: The article has a redundancy about the environment's preventative effect on the construction. In the History section at the second to last paragraph, the "volatile climate" is introduced. Then in the Risks and Opposition section at the third to last point, the "feasibility" is reiterated in a slightly different way. Also, the same external link is cited twice inside the Reference section.

Thanks for your consideration! Sincerely, Usulutan86 (talk) 19:27, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Impact on Panama
The section on impact on other economies doesn't discuss (or even mention) what impact such a canal would have on Panama, whose canal is a key aspect of its economy. 64.53.191.77 (talk) 04:31, 31 December 2015 (UTC)