Talk:River Rivelin

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the River Rivelin article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Sheffield Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sheffield, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sheffield 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.SheffieldWikipedia:WikiProject SheffieldTemplate:WikiProject SheffieldSheffield articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

UK Waterways Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject UK Waterways, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of UK Waterways 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.UK WaterwaysWikipedia:WikiProject UK WaterwaysTemplate:WikiProject UK WaterwaysUK Waterways articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Yorkshire Low‑importance

	Yorkshire portal River Rivelin is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rivers Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Photo

The photo' seems really small, I'd suggest |300px|. Though I see the logic in not increasing the size of photo's too much in articles, a reasonable size which permits a clear vision of the scene and doesn't require the reader to click and access the image page, is very user friendly (and probably much more attractive to younger readers). Any comments? Wikityke 01:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-Thanks for the modification.(And, by the way, very nice photo' ! ). Wikityke 12:03, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I go around often. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 12:35, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It could have been easily done yourself. You are encouraged to be bold in your editing. Simply click edit this page, find the image and increase from 150px to 300px (or whatever) L.J.Skinner_{something to say?} 19:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right ! - But when it's just a question of STYLE, rather than fact, I prefer to consult the original contributor, before making modifications. - Anyway, thanks for your comment, and your contributions, Lewis. Wikityke 22:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Loxley/Rivelin

I've reversed the reference to the Rivelin being joined by the Loxley because Ordnance Survey maps name the course of the combined rivers below their confluence as "River Loxley" (see OS pathfinder map SK 28/38).--Mabzilla (talk) 15:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

I think that these need to be merge onto one page. The two articles are both short and seem to deal with the same issue and have a very similar scope. L.J.Skinner^{wot|I did} 14:46, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense; in physical and human terms a river and its valley are parts of an integrated system.--Mabzilla (talk) 09:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great! If there's no opposition by this weekend I'll make the merge. If there is, I think we'll need to develop a consensus. I should go and leave a message on WP:Sheff and WP:Yorkshire as well. L.J.Skinner^{wot|I did} 19:30, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I support the merge. It takes me back as I spent a lot of time there as a kid in the 1950s. --Bduke (talk) 00:46, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merging seems a good idea to me. Wikityke (talk) 23:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New split proposal (Feb 2011)

I am proposing to split the River Rivelin page and move some of the text to a new article called “Rivelin Valley”. I know this has been done before, but that was almost three years ago and the article has expanded and much of the text does not actually refer to the river anymore and this should be taken out. Rivelin Valley Road, Rivelin Dams, Rivelin Rocks, King Edward VII Hospital and St Michael’s Cemetery have no connection to the River and I propose to take out the text from the Rivelin Valley Road and Significant buildings sections. I work in the valley and the local population regard the Rivelin Valley as a rural suburb of Sheffield. Please vote For or Against. Thanks Mick Knapton (talk) 18:19, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Proposal well formulated, no issues. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 18:46, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Against. A river needs a context, and details of dams, rocks, Rivelin Valley Road, etc supply that context. By all means trim it down a little if a separte article is created, but do not remove it altogether, or you just end up clicking links rather than reading a coherent article about a subject. Bob1960evens (talk) 11:30, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Against. I agree with Bob1960evens's points. A river and the valley it creates are parts of a system and should be considered together; It might be necessary to split the article for convenience if it becomes too unwieldy because of material about urban expansion etc, but I don't think it's reached that point yet.--Mabzilla (talk) 16:52, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source of the River Rivelin

The page says, "It rises on the Hallam moors, in north west Sheffield". The OS map shows the watercourse flowing into the Rivelin Upper Reservoir as being the Rivelin Brook. For a quick link to OS grid square SK2687 see the http://www.geograph.org.uk/browse.php?p=348568 webpage and click on the 1:50 000 map to bring up the 1:25 000 map and then zoom in. At OS SK2786, where the river flows out of the Rivelin Lower Reservoir it is shown as the River Rivelin. I suspect that historically the the watercourse changed from a brook to a river at the confluence of the Wyming Brook (which flows into the Lower Reservoir) and the Rivelin Brook. If this is so, should the article reflect this? The https://www.old-maps.co.uk/#/Map/427400/386700 site is no help as the dams predate the earliest map.

Waugh Bacon (talk) 06:30, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed flood defence scheme

The 2014 BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-29245851 web page says 'If funding (for the flood defence scheme) is gained the full programme is planned to be completed by 2021.' Now, in 2022, no work has gone ahead in the Rivelin Valley. Has the plan been put on hold or has it been scrapped? 2A00:23C8:A88E:8000:D03E:9190:6E52:4B50 (talk) 00:09, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of deletion of section

I have reverted the deletion of a section as the history of water wheels is important and it was the fast flow that allowed them. I used to walk along the river 60 years ago and the dams with their feeder links and then a drop to drive the water wheels existed then, but the dams have I think all silted up and the water wheels have been removed or just decayed. I have not been there for quite a while. --Bduke (talk) 23:45, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]