Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of northward-flowing rivers of the United States


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. Spartaz Humbug! 04:27, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

List of northward-flowing rivers of the United States

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Listcruft. Questionable notability - why should there be a list about north flowing rivers but none about rivers that flow west, south and east? The entire list is based on the very dubious and unreferenced concept that few rivers flow north. Not surprisingly other articles based on the same concept, like Devil's river and List of rivers that flow north have been deleted already. Also, very much an unlimited and unverifiable list as first, defining what north flowing is very arbitrary, with most rivers flowing in many different directions and secondly, an arbitrary definition of what a river is (are creaks and streams rivers?). Kostja (talk) 12:19, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  —Kostja (talk) 12:37, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. As pointed out by Kostja, it is not clear, what "north flowing" means. Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  14:51, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:35, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - An interesting and useful list. Carrite (talk) 16:09, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not useful, except to dispel a myth, which it does so badly by promoting the mythical idea in the first place. See this talk page comment and Articles for deletion/List of rivers that flow north for more. Uncle G (talk) 16:17, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete and trout Carrite for extremely inappropriate !vote. Simply trivia. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:35, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't really have an opinion on this particular list, but the belief that northward rivers are rare is a persistent one which Wikipedia should address in some way or some form of this list will just keep getting re-created. Or another way to look at it, there's nothing special about north flowing rivers, but the myth that there is might itself be worth writing about. Kmusser (talk) 17:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unsourced, and contradicts the linked articles (the first one I click on has an article saying "flows west and north"). "Flowing north" is a poorly defined concept anyway, since many rivers twist and turn: it is more usual to classify rivers by what they flow into. -- Radagast 3 (talk) 23:43, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per all above, particularly the point that 'flowing north' is poorly defined, and hence this list has no clear inclusion criteria. Robofish (talk) 00:41, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of rivers of the United States. At the moment, that article is broken down into 24 smaller articles which offer very little information other than the state(s) through which the rivers flow.  Hopefully, there will be something on the the order of a sortable table, with information about length, tributaries, and direction.  Unfortunately, the key information-- that "due to the shape of the North American landmass and the location of most of the contiguous United States in the southern half of North America", most rivers in the United States do not flow in a northward direction-- has never been sourced, so this one was begging to be nominated, and it will probably lose.  I'm all in favor of encouraging topics about the subject of hydrography.  I think that the question "why should there be a list about north flowing rivers but none about rivers that flow west, south and east?" raises the need for a more informative table of U.S. rivers.  The reason why our nation's rivers tend to flow west, south and east, of course, is that they empty into bodies of water in the west (Pacific Ocean), the south (Gulf of Mexico) and the east (Atlantic Ocean).  Mandsford 18:30, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. While Mandsford has a valid point, I don't see what content needs to be merged here or how leaving the redirect would serve a purpose (per the delete comments above, and Uncle G's note). Drmies (talk) 18:33, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. "List of X in Y that Z" articles really need to justify the topic. "Rivers in the United States" is a well-established geographical topic, but I have a hard time figuring out why "flows northwards" should be singled out. As I said in the broader AFD in 2006, rivers flow in all sorts of directions, and northwards is not a particularly significant direction. Sjakkalle (Check!)  15:51, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, but I feel compelled to point out that there is a scientific basis for the "myth" -- and, thus, a potentially sound context for the article. That is, there is a reason why few rivers in the continental U.S. flow north. When glaciers covered much of northern North America, they produced huge amounts of meltwater that flowed away from the glacier ice, which mostly meant south (also east and west). That meltwater carved out major river valleys (like the valleys of the Mississippi, Ohio, Hudson, Connecticut, and Columbia Rivers) that now form much of the continent's drainage system -- and that drainage system includes few rivers that flow north. However, this list of rivers that flow north does not belong in an encyclopedia. These rivers have nothing much in common other than flowing north. Thus, there's no unifying principle for this list or any list like it. At best, the list could be used to solve barroom arguments, but since it's inherently difficult to define "what constitutes a river for the purpose of this list?" and "how much northward flow does it have to have to qualify?", I don't imagine that it would be particularly effective even at settling barroom quarrels. --Orlady (talk) 02:44, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.