Talk:Oak Ridges Moraine

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. Peer reviewers: Ivahawk, Serchans.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled

The Oak Ridges Moraine is a significant natural region that deserves greater breadth of coverage than it currently has in the article. Possible ideas for inclusion are: maps of the area, information about its' watersheds, rivers and other tributaries, communities in the region, wildlife (any indiginous species?), etc.Mindmatrix

Many thanks to Mindmatrix for this great list of resources. I've used the Nature Conservancy link to add to the article on endangered species. We still need the following:

• Create a new section on the political struggle to develop/save the moraine;
• expand the section on preserving the moraine;
• more on the ecology of the moraine;
• a really good picture or map (preferably both), and, of course,
• copyediting and improvements throughout. Sunray 15:07, 2005 May 2 (UTC)

I've added a Politics and Environment section; there is still plenty to add in each; I'll work on this soon, unless someone beats me to it. Other things to do:

• create a geography section, using info currently in the intro and description of... section;
• find an image of an Acadian Flycatcher, an endangered species in Canada, which has nesting grounds in Happy Valley Forests on the Oak Ridges Moraine;
• perhaps create articles for any red-links on the page;
• someone please copyedit my recent contributions. Mindmatrix 17:49, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

I've gone back to an organization of the headings along the lines it was before with a separate section for ecology (which think works better than "environment"). Let me know what you think. Sunray 06:33, 2005 May 6 (UTC)

I think you were reading my mind about the Ecology section. I had the same idea late last night, and thought I'd make the change this morning. Let's keep it. (In fact, I'm going to change a few other articles I've worked on to use that same section header.) Mindmatrix 13:09, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

I've added the following articles: West Virginia White Butterfly, Jefferson Salamander, Ontario Municipal Board and Seaton, Ontario. That covers all the red-links from this article. Mindmatrix 22:32, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Headers

Sunray, the heading "Action to save the moraine" has a certain leaning toward environmental groups. I'd like that whole section to reflect the political issues involved with the moraine, both from a preservation standpoint and a development perspective. I agree that Politics isn't a particularly good heading, though, and prefer the current title. (Perhaps this could be done in two sections?) I also don't like the "Research history" header, but I couldn't think of anything better.

I may also merge the "Development pressures" section into other parts of the document, or the section could be expanded and re-titled. It bothers me as it currently exists. Mindmatrix 17:49, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

I would think it could be expanded considerably. Also, it needs some editing, IMO.

Good point about "Action to save the moraine" having an environmental slant to it. Perhaps "Political action" would be better. "Politics" implies folks in suits, rather than grass-roots activism, which has been a major factor in the struggle to save the moraine. I agree with you about "Research history." Sunray 18:01, 2005 May 10 (UTC)

"Political action" is certainly better.

One other thing that bothers me about the article is the number of paragraphs that start with "The moraine..."; I've attempted to avoid that with new additions, which sometimes results in awkward sentences. We'll have to edit some of them away. Mindmatrix 18:54, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Re-working the technical sections

Mindmatrix should be recognized for the excellent work he has done to bring this from a relatively non-descript semi-stub to a very comprehensive and interesting article. I think it does suffer slightly, though, by having the fairly technical Geological section at the beginnning of the article. It is heavy going and perhaps detracts from the major issue to do with the moraine: the struggle for its preservation. I wonder if the headings should be re-organized or even have the Geology section made into a separate article with a short summary and link. What do you think? Sunray 22:29, 2005 May 16 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words Sunray; and thanks for editing my work. As far as the geological origins stuff is concerned, I initially wrote it for precision, with every intention of simplifying it. The third paragraph is a tough one, and the fourth is OK, though it has a few uncommon words (eg - varves). Substitutions for words like glaciofluvial can be difficult, since they may require a sentence or more to describe. The second paragraph only needs a minor tweak to make it readable; simpler words, less densely packed may be in order. The first paragraph is easily changed. I'll make some changes, and anyone's certainly welcome to change things as they see fit.

I've barely scratched the surface of this topic, judging by the resources I've found. I'd like to have a number of sections, each of which has two or three paragraphs leading to other articles with a better discussion of that topic, but that's a lot of work. The Political action section is almost at that stage.

Ideally, I'd like to make this article significant enough that it would become a featured article on the Wikipedia Main Page. Moreover, I'd like to use it to set an example for the proposed Geography of Ontario article, in terms of article quality and breadth of coverage. That's probably a bit too ambitious, though. Mindmatrix 00:01, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

For clarification, here's a quick list of words and definitions:

Reentrant - pointing or directed inwards

Subglacial - below the ice(sheet)

Glaciofluvial - river on/of ice

Lacustrine - relating to lakes or ponds

Glaciolacustrine - relating to glacial lakes or ponds

Subaqueous fans - delta-like regions below the water/ice level

Diamicton - indeterminate and random sediments

Use this information as you please... Mindmatrix 00:14, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Well, I've edited all but the third paragraph. I think it's more legible now. That third paragraph is a tough one, though. I'll have to think about it. Mindmatrix 00:39, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

The edit of the Geological origins section is good and it reads well now. It is still very technical, (not that that is a bad thing, per se, however, I thought it might be a good idea to move the *issue* up front and centre. We might even want to proceed with the re-write of the "Development pressures" section, possiblly re-titled, and move it up too. Sunray 01:14, 2005 May 17 (UTC)

Map

Great map added by NormanEinstein! This article is beginning to look pretty good. Many thanks to all who have contributed. A possible featured article candidate? Sunray 18:04, 2005 Jun 2 (UTC)

Indeed, that map really adds zest to the article.

Sunray, I don't think the article is feature-quality yet; it's pretty weak in some areas, and it really isn't comprehensive, though we have good coverage in some sections. I'll try to come up with a list of information that needs to be added (or spun off to another article).

BTW: I'll also expand the article at some point, but the research I've been doing for this is time-consuming, and that doesn't include writing about my findings. I do have lots to add still, but it'll be at a slower pace than my previous edits. I just needed a break... Mindmatrix 19:06, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I see what you mean—perhaps I was dazzled by Norman's map! I just re-read it and it does need some more work. I will try to do some more copyediting and simplifying. Sunray 05:22, 2005 Jun 3 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments, guys. I have a better version of the map almost done, but I wanted to put something up on the page as notice that someone was working on it. Hopefully I'll find some quiet time tomorrow at work to finish it. --NormanEinstein 21:38, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

What could be better than that? Sunray 05:22, 2005 Jun 3 (UTC)

Featured article push

I've been looking over the featured article criteria to see what we need to do to get this article to featured status. So far, this article fails in:

• comprehensiveness (criterion 2) - I'll write about this later
• standards for style (criterion 4) - doesn't fail this, but we need to ensure we meet the standards
• images (criterion 5) - this article needs a few more to capture the essence of the text

I think we do OK on the other criteria. Mindmatrix 14:18, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Article comprehensiveness

This is what I think needs to be done to make this a featured article candidate:

1. Create a Geology section that describes the structure of the moraine
   • move the Geological origins section to Origin of the Oak Ridges Moraine, and expand it
   • write the Geology section from scratch, describing the major components of the moraine
   • (maybe) add an image similar to figure 3 on this page
2. Split the Political action section to a new article (title?)
   • retain and highlight main points
   • expand new article; lots of info on Richmond Hill to add
   • add images to highlight major discussion points for that section (location of Seaton, Richmond Hill etc on ORM)
3. Create a Conservation section (I'd prefer a different name)
   • add info about conservation and preservation plans
   • add info about organizations involved (STORM, TRCA etc)
   • also note current and planned developments on the ORM
4. Create separate article about the Ecology of the Oak Ridges Moraine
   • add info about provincially and nationally significant ecological areas on the ORM
   • retain a brief overview in the main ORM article; mention a few of the prominent areas introduced in the new article
   • many images can be added to this section; let's find a few good ones

I'm sure I've missed a few things. I'll work on this bit by bit over the summer, and hopefully we can have a very strong featured article candidate for August or September. As you can tell, I plan on this being one of the best articles in Wikipedia. Any comments, suggestions or complaints? Mindmatrix 14:45, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This looks good to me. I had been thinking about the need to expand the Political action section, particularly the history of the movement to save the moraine. Your idea of a separate section makes sense. We could produce a nice tight overview of the political considerations for this article with a link. Same with ecology. There is so much. A good summary with a link would be good. Re-writing the geology section also makes sense, though we would need to be careful not to get too technical—this is a general encyclopedia, after all. If the section were to be much longer, it too should be a summary section with a link, I think. I like the idea of a Conservation section. Why don't you like that as a heading? The rest of your suggestions I also agree with. Sunray 18:15, 2005 Jun 3 (UTC)

Lots of questions to answer...let's see:

1. Conservation is OK; depends on my current mood, I guess :-)
2. I think the name Politics of the Oak Ridges Moraine would be consistent with the other forms. Yes/No?
3. I like your re-write of the Ecology section; I've copy-edited, and I'll do one more pass for fact-checking.
4. The new geology section will probably not be derived from the current version; it'll be very general. The companion article may get technical, but since it's devoted to that subject alone, more elaboration is possible.
5. I think we should ensure that the Political action, Conservation and Development sections are cohesive and flow well, given that they are strongly linked.

Also, I was thinking about reverting layout to order sections as: Geology, Ecology, Hydrology, Development/Conservation/Politics. This would require expanding the intro to make the reader aware of the greater issue of development. I propose this because:

1. The Geo/Eco/Hydro-logy sections will be shorter.
2. It has a more natural flow.
3. Will readers be more interested in the physical structure, or the political issues?
4. I'm trying to find something with which you'll disagree; it's spooky when someone agrees with everything I say or write!

That's about all for now. Mindmatrix 00:45, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

1. Think positive! Conservation = good.
2. Yes. A friend of mine who was involved in the beginning says he will look it over and give us some suggestions.
3. Great.
4. That sounds promising.
5. For sure.

I like ecology near the top as it is the primary issue. Unless we put the Conservation section first... Are you saying that you want to combine Development/Conservation/Politics? Not sure I agree with that. :-) Sunray 05:31, 2005 Jun 6 (UTC)

No, I don't want to combine those three sections. I want them to appear one after the other, as either:

• Politics -> Development -> Conservation
• Development -> Politics -> Conservation

Those make the most sense to me. Anyway, I've re-written a few sections now; some are temporary placeholders for future revisions (eg - geological origins). The article is much more compact now. Mindmatrix 15:26, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

IMHO, the separated articles were not expanded enough to warrant staying separate. There are Featured articles that are much longer that this one would be even if all the material wa sput back in. I'd have to say that the table in Ecology of the Oak Ridges Moraine could gain in staeing separated, though. Circeus 05:08, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

I think merging the articles is a good idea. --NormanEinstein 12:59, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

At least give me a chance to meet the goals I defined above: I'll work on this bit by bit over the summer, and hopefully we can have a very strong featured article candidate for August or September. (My target is now late September.) I've been making changes to copies I have on my system, and will merge them into the appropriate articles once I've properly cited references, removed any latent copyvios etc. My first update will probably come next week for the Origin of the Oak Ridges Moraine article. Mindmatrix 18:39, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I can understand that, I didn't really *read* thrugh the whole thing. I still think the split was premature.

No problem - I should have stated that I was working on it off-line. Mindmatrix 19:40, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Internet Links

Some of these may have useful information that can be used to expand the article:

• International Association for Great Lakes Research: Case Study: The Oak Ridges Moraine
• Hunter Geographic Hydrogeology Study
• The Oak Ridges Moraine
• City of Toronto info on Oak Ridges Moraine
• City of richmond Hill info on Oak Ridges Moraine
• City of Pickering: Studies by Outside Agencies
  • Note: affiliation of those agencies to various groups is not reported
• Ontario Ministry of Housing: Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
• Oak Ridges Trail Association
• Ontario nature: The Oak Ridges Moraine
• Government of Ontario - Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing: North Pickering Land Exchange

Municipal and Provincial Planning

• Town of Newmarket proposed Official Plan and Zoning Bylaw amendments regarding the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
• Program to bring the East Gwillimbury Official Plan, Mount Albert Community Plan and Zoning By-law # 97- 50 Into conformity with the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
• Township of King Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Conformity Exercise
• Ontario Professional Planners Institute: Position Paper on the Oak Ridges Moraine (PDF)

Environmental Organizations, Activists etc

• Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation
• Save the Oak Ridges Moraine (STORM) coalition
• Environmental Defence - Protecting the Oak Ridges Moraine
• Green Ontario: Saving the Oak Ridges Moraine
• Sierra Club of Canada: Response to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs Regarding the Oak Ridges Moraine Advisory Panel
• Protecting Happy Valley Forest on the Oak Ridges Moraine (PDF)
• Nature Conservancy Canada: The Oak Ridges Moraine

Developers and pro-development groups

• UDI Ontario: Oak Ridges Moraine Settlement in the Best Interests of the Province and Taxpayers

Mindmatrix 16:15, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: ERTH 4303 Resources of the Earth

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 January 2023 and 15 April 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): RockySurfaces (article contribs). Peer reviewers: User5843, Connorhs25.

— Assignment last updated by ChloejWard (talk) 03:40, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I am proposing a new section about regional geology on the main Oak Ridges Moraine page that both has new information and takes already provided information from associated heading of Origin of the Oak Ridges Moraine.

This would include geologic formations and units present, (possible) sedimentary structures along with some basic descriptions of their characteristics. RockySurfaces (talk) 18:00, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I have since created a new section about the geology of the Oak Ridges Moraine system, and placed it under the Ecology section. This may need to be rearranged later for better flow in the overall article. Next plans are to continue researching and expanding this section, and reworking the article Lead to reflect the changes added. It has been pointed out by peers that some sections may also need to be updated with new research and expand those sections to show that. RockySurfaces (talk) 16:16, 12 March 2023 (UTC)