Talk:Marañón River

Rivers High‑importance

	Geography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers 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.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Peru High‑importance

This article is supported by WikiProject Peru. This project provides a central approach to Peru-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.PeruWikipedia:WikiProject PeruTemplate:WikiProject PeruPeru articles

High

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

WikiProject Peru To-do:

Assess and prioritise articles (log)
Check for copyvios at Special:Contributions/Priscilla D, tag as {{Db-copyvio}} where appropriate
Create:
Expand: new articles; top importance articles
FAC / FLC: Peru national football team
GAN:
Merge requests: Amazonas before the Inca Empire, Chachapoyas culture
Review: Shining Path, Universitario de Deportes
Translate: National University of San Marcos
Work on Lima, the current article improvement drive
Wikify: articles needing attention

Comments

other meanings

Tobias Conradi (Talk) 02:27, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Page Moved?!?!

OK... due to a copy/paste move by anonymous user 80.58.48.172, I have renamed this page and reunited it with its history and talk page. An administrator might have been able to do a cleaner job, but I think this is working ok. Of course, if anyone would like to attempt to rename it or name it back, that's fine with me, as long as it's not a copy/paste job. Thanks. Gsd97jks 01:16,odm 27 October 2005 (UTC)

section Dams planned for the Marañón and opposition

This section is sheer political editorializing - nothing has actually happened there. The encyclopedia is not a forum for reporting news and debate. I propose the secton be deleted, or moved into a footnote.Sbalfour (talk) 17:40, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

descent history

The descent history paragraph belongs in the Guiness Book of World Records, not here. There are now other documented successes as well as tragic attempts to do this. I'm not going to add them. I think this paragraph smacks of WP:PROMOTION, as well as not in compliance with WP:NOT#STATS. I propose the paragraph be deleted.Sbalfour (talk) 17:49, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

La Condamine's descent

The section says his was one of the first "popular" descents of the Maranon. What's an "unpopular" descent? If I do a descent, is that "popular"? The whole section is quite a bit of tedious detail, and omits the thing of overarching importance: WHO was La Condamine, and WHY did he do the descent, since plenty of persons starting with Orellano, Tavares and Aguirre, made that descent before him. His was the first scientific study of the flora and fauna of the river. La Condamine was primarily a scientist, not an adventurer. The section needs to be restructured to convey the hydrographic and topological description separate from the details of La Condamine's journey, which are not significant. Wikipedia is not a tourist or travel brochure.Sbalfour (talk) 18:04, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

single, unreliable source

Most of the article is transliterated, if not outright cut-and-pasted, from what is basically an ecotourism website, http://www.sierrarios.org. Another cited reference is to an Amazon.com splash page for a book (evidently, if this is the best the editor could do, he didn't own or read the book). The text of the article is just a bit too "tourist-y" for a concise scholarly encyclopedia article. I don't see any outright inaccuracies, but the article's tone needs changed, and buttressed by properly styled citations to reliable published scholarly sources.Sbalfour (talk) 18:19, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]