Talk:List of dams in the Columbia River watershed

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Canada: British Columbia / Geography List‑class Mid‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
List	This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Geography of Canada.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Oregon List‑class Mid‑importance

	Oregon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon 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.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles
List	This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Rivers List‑class

	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
List	This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United States: Washington Unassessed

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington.

Energy Unassessed

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy 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.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United States: Idaho Unassessed

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Idaho portal This article is supported by WikiProject Idaho.

Montana Unassessed

	Montana portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Montana, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Montana 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.MontanaWikipedia:WikiProject MontanaTemplate:WikiProject MontanaMontana articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

stub?

So, why exactly is this a stub, and what should be done to expand it? It is a complete list of every dam on the Columbia, which is what the title implies. It has additional info about each dam, which to my mind is over and above what one would expect.

I do think it would be good to have an article some day about hydro dams in the Columbia basin, but that would be a separate project.

So is it really a stub? -Pete (talk) 23:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tables

I made a table for the Snake River dams, or at least those that have pages on wikipedia. I think this kind of thing would be nice, and can add more for other tributaries over time. I'm not sure whether to mention, somehow outside the table, dams without a page (and some of which confuse me to start with). The ones mentioned on the page now (except Bliss) that aren't in my table are: Shoshone Falls Project, Upper Salmon Falls Project (Upper Salmon Falls Dam A, Upper Salmon Falls Dam B), and Mid-Snake Projects (Bliss Dam, Lower Salmon Falls Dam, and the two dams of the Upper Salmon Falls Project). Sorry for removing them, please add back if there's a good way to do it that I'm not seeing. Also, if this table idea isn't ideal, let's try something else. I just thought since the mainstem dams are tabled, others can be too. The table fields are just what made sense to mention offhand. They could be altered if desired. Pfly (talk) 04:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Pfly, I was thinking this should be done, but was feeling too lazy to do it. I think all the dams should be included in the table, regardless of whether there are articles about them. Also, I believe the "no fish passage" note is actually an error I introduced into the Hells Canyon article a while back; I believe it's the ACE dams in Washington that block fish passage, not the Hells Canyon Dam. But I had such a hard time finding a source that actually came out and said that, I'm a little hesitant to say it for sure.... -Pete (talk) 05:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More generally...I'd like to suggest to you and Kmusser that the new map include the Condit Dam and the Bull Run Hydroelectric Project, which are notable due to the efforts to remove them. Also, probably some of the smaller ones along the Willamette and its tributaries, like the Detroit Dam, and the one at Lake Harriet, and probably the Willamette Falls Locks. It's true that it will be hard to determine good inclusion criteria, but I think just exercising our collective judgment will be good enough. Another thought is to use a number in the map for each dam -- like a "1" in a circle, which allows for a key such as "Bonneville Dam". Those in a single project could share a number. -Pete (talk) 05:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Map

Map progress - Currently I'm planning on showing all the dams and then just labeling the big ones. I'm thinking of trying to show 2 aspects, varying the size of dot for the height of the dam, and the color for ownership. For height will probably just do a small, medium, large. For ownership I'm thinking 4 categories: Federal, Public Utility, Other government (state/prov./local), Private. Mentioned previously was the idea of making the treaty dams stand out - anyone point me to a list of those? Any other comments? Kmusser (talk) 18:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kmusser, what do you think of using numbers or letters in the map graphic, and using the caption (and the text area of the image page) for the key/legend? This would allow wikilinking the dam names, and makes it possible to identify the most significant dams without clicking anywhere. For a fairly crude example of this approach, see here: Image:Map mount hood vicinity.png. To your question, I think the Columbia River Treaty article has the info you need -- if you have more questions about that though, I suspect Pfly can answer them better than I can. Also, I have no problem with listing by height, but is there a good reason not to use megawatts? -Pete (talk) 16:50, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am currently going with this approach, there just isn't room to label the dams otherwise. I'm not using megawatts because A) I'm including non-hydroelectric dams and B) I found the megawatt info I do have to be very incomplete and it would take quite a bit more research to do so. That said I have an atlas that has a map showing dams with circle sizes proportional to megawatt capacity and it's really cool so it might be worth the effort to re-create - maybe as a separate map, or used in this one and set the non-hydroloelectric dams to a standard size - unfortunately it only has the U.S. side of the border though. Kmusser (talk) 17:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a working list of dams I'm planning on labeling at User:Kmusser/dams, anything missing? Kmusser (talk) 16:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, great list! I'd like to see the following added in, for their historic significance: Willamette Falls Locks (not a dam, but important), Condit Dam, and Bull Run Hydroelectric Project. Also, I don't know the names of many of them -- but do you have any dams on the Willamette River system? The one by Estacada on the Clackamas (is it Faraday Dam, maybe?) Detroit Dam? Lake Harriet? -Pete (talk)

I think I can squeeze on Willamette Falls and Condit. I have Portland #1 which can stand in for the Bull Run project and I have lots of Willamette system dams - enough that I may want to take some out.Kmusser (talk) 17:22, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, a draft of a new map is done, please take a look at it. Do check for errors, I found quite a few in my source data and I'm not sure I found them all. Also check to see if I categorized the ownership correctly, the source data wasn't always consistent, especially when it comes to utility vs private. General map comments? I think it might be too busy, but am not sure what to take out. Also this one really should be an SVG file but I can't get it to come out right and it crashes Inkscape, if anyone else wants to take a crack at converting it I'll happily send you the Illustrator file. Kmusser (talk) 19:59, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that is really an amazing piece of work Karl! I am so impressed and appreciative! Great job. I love how you have so many smaller dams too -- it really gives a sense of the scale of development.

A few specifics:

Having the numerals be red might be confusing (with the "utility company" label.) Might be better to make them black or grey?
I'd like to see color splotches in the table as well -- maybe in the ownership column?
Moving the table from WP to Commons broke most of the links. I think I got them all fixed, but I used the "w:" prefix instead of "en:" (not really sure what the difference is.) If this is a problem, a simple search-and-replace in a text editor ought to fix it.

Great work! -Pete (talk) 22:15, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]