Talk:Salton Sink

California: Southern California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Southern California task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Geology Low‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Salton Sink is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

There is no vandalism intended or done by my previous edits and reverts to this article or "Category Southern Mojave". Removing and reverting mine is not consistent with "Northern Mojave - Mono" category which has consistently included a few select specific articles to assist non-hydrologists to locate the region and begin to understand it. I am the one originating the talk page here. Took "to heart" top banner on both categories to "help populate" them, and since appreciated their recent creation did many sincere Good Faith efforts to do so. Category originator needs to please stop name calling, and instead to communicate rationale for different approaches, Thank you.----Look2See1 t a l k → 19:02, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

syntax corrections--Look2See1 t a l k → 19:05, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note; User:71.219.172.174 still refuses to discuss category questions here. User only reverts my good faith edits with presumptuous and incorrect language about my intention and does not 'assume good faith' - instead name-calling of vandalism. I claim good faith for both of us, in my reverts, & have no interest in "edit wars" - only in readers finding article that use geographical name rather than geographical-hydrological (Great Basin-Watershed) parent-grandparent category links. Have kindly asked User:71.219.172.174 to discuss, and also set up this page to do so, however they are unwilling to do so from first edit to present date.----Look2See1 t a l k → 00:28, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Salton Sink has more than one "family" here, like many modern entities, so another "Parent - Grandparent" category lineage is appropriate. It seems like domination vandalism to disown an "inlaw - partner" family lineage of Salton Sink, though editor's motivations unexplained by them. User:71.219.172.174 has been unable-unwilling to return positive understanding continuously extended and expressed to them.----Look2See1 t a l k → 00:40, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE; Comment on article's history/edit page, by 71.219.169.105, now & pasted here below by--Look2See1 t a l k → 23:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC):[reply]

Salton Sink‎; 21:46 . . (-108) . . 71.219.169.105 (talk) (Removed PARENT category for Category:Geography of the Colorado Desert placed via vandalous edits (3) by User:Look2See1, who lied about discussion he has LOOKed & SEEn in edit summary!)

NOTE: That editor 71.219.169.105 continues to revert my edits without discussion here, and continues to presume and mis-assume my intentions in their comments misplaced on edit page "brief comment box" instead of here. Have concern that editor has "edit war &/or vandalism by "vandalism labeling others' non-vandalism reverts" tendencies now, or at least has a non-communication issue in order to dominate & 'own' an article? One cannot force another to discuss, so will continue to good faith revert category to include the additional 'Parent Category lineage' that 'needs inclusion & that 71.219.169.105 is not focused on/validating.----Look2See1 t a l k → 23:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected due to edit warring by anon with misleading and incivil edit summaries. Anon also added citation needed and other tags predated to June 09 and other tags referring to discussion page without discussing anything here. The anon is invited to discuss their concerns here. Vsmith (talk) 03:31, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article does need additional sources and to be better defined. What are the boundaries of the ill-defined geographic sink or depressed area. The tectonic Salton Trough (needs an article) is better defined and produced the topographically low area this article is struggling to define. Vsmith (talk) 03:31, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

History

The language of this section is poorly crafted. Is it trying to say that the Colorado river was diverted by canal to create two new rivers that dumped waters into the lowest lying area of the Salton Sink to recreate the Salton Sea? After several re-readings, I am still not sure what river is referred to. Aramink (talk) 23:01, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]