Talk:Bay mud

A fact from Bay mud appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 5 June 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that bay mud is a significant estuarine ecological resource, but went unstudied until humans began building high-rise structures near bays?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/June.

Wikipedia

Soil Low‑importance

	Earth sciences portal Bay mud is within the scope of WikiProject Soil, which collaborates on Soil and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.SoilWikipedia:WikiProject SoilTemplate:WikiProject SoilSoil articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Fisheries and Fishing High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing 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.Fisheries and FishingWikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingTemplate:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingFishing articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): CbUSP101. Peer reviewers: CbUSP101.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 15:28, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More worldwide info

This article needs cleanup. It's not well-organized, and is too focused on the issue of environmental regulations affecting development on Bay Mud, to the exclusion of the geotechnical engineering issues, and even the actual environmental issues. There's no acknolwlegement that Bay Mud is frequently found beneath layers of fill, and that Old Bay Mud is frequently found under alluvial layers. It's also too Bay Area-centric - does the Qobm/Qybm distinction exist elsewhere? Argyriou 17:43, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is completely fine and almost necessary to have this article be focused on the bay area. As others have stated there is little information on other cities or countries, and SF is experiencing some serious problems with the structures that are built on dredged bay mud. However, it is imperative to talk about CEQA when discussing policy decisions surrounding mudflats in the Bay Area. Also, if referring to any development in California the proposed development could have to go through a planning commission, a city council, or even up to the state level depending on how big the project is. CbUSP101 (talk) 22:19, 3 November 2016

Policy surrounding sea level rise

A discussion about policies that are in place or that should be implemented specifically surrounding sea level rise and its effects on this ecosystem should, at the very least, be held in the talk section and possibly added to the article. CbUSP101 (talk) 22:19, 3 November 2016

Negative Externalities from development

Another interesting aspect, that could be discussed on this article or another, is the negative externalities created by building on dredged Mudflats. The Bay Area, more specifically the Millennium Tower in SF, is a prime example because it is currently sinking. This type of negative externality has a tremendous effect on the people living in the buildings and even more of a negative effect on the surrounding areas. CbUSP101 (talk) 22:19, 3 November 2016

Confusion of main topic due to added topics

This article should be either strictly the first section, or should be more inclusive of information needed to fully understand bay mud, mudflats, engineering, policy, etc. When broadening the scope of information and not fully explaining the added aspects, one can become rather confused on the goal of the article. Adding new focuses that aren't fully explained, besides Bay Mud, can lead to an individual believing that they are fully informed on a subject when they are not. CbUSP101 (talk) 22:19, 3 November 2016

please sign postings if you are serious about improving this article. i have added text to the article to note the alluvial and fill comments above. as far as the Bay Area centric issue, ive done a lot of researching and havent found much except for the material ive included on UK and east coast. i think the problem here is (as stated in the article) bay mud was not studied extensively until substantial buildings started to encroach into marginal areas like bay perimeters where (a) bay muds exist and (b) a vigourous regulatory framework exists. Guess where the confluence of (a) and (b) is? yes the SF Bay area. i would be most appreciative of ideas where data exists in other parts of the world. as far as general cleanup is concerned, i welcome any help, but seriously this article is better written and better referenced than 97 percent of all wikipedia articles. Covalent 05:18, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about not signing the above. Unfortunately, the problem of the article being Bay-Area-centric is one which I will have a hard time helping with, as all of my experience with Bay Mud is in the Bay Area. The regulatory vs engineering stuff is something I will be working on, mostly in my free time at work. Argyriou 17:43, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a section on worldwide occurrences. unfortunately there is little engineering data on most of these, since no one is trying to build high-rise structures on them. i think we have milked the worldwide issue to its limit of knowledge hereCovalent 21:07, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the suggested merger

The suggested merger is a thoroughly bad idea. Bay mud describes the material, mudflats describes the geological feature formed by the material. Clearly both are not the same and warrant distinct articles. 86.56.48.12 15:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bay mud. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:17, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]