Collab talk:Federal States/Natural features

From OpenGeofiction
General discussion on this page should be placed at the bottom. Committee discussions should be posted in the relevant section below.

River 1 Committee

I really liked the name Colurona for this river. I've used it for certain regional sites in Sierra, and has a name that could be of both Indigenous or Castellanese origin. Brunanter (talk) 00:51, 14 June 2019 (CEST)

Any interest in selecting a name for this river? It's been over six months since we've had a majority to agree on one. Brunanter (talk) 02:21, 14 January 2020 (CET)
I'm not really involved with the Colurona River area, but I would like to know its etymology. Which real-world language is used in 'Colurona'?
IiEarth (talk) 07:46, 25 January 2020 (CET)
Not sure who came up with the name. I just liked it became it sounded nice, and seemed "real". Brunanter (talk) 15:40, 25 January 2020 (CET)

River 2 Committee

It appears the Alormen coordinators have already named the river. Is this allowed? Talk to Rhiney boi 21:31, 4 July 2019 (CEST)

Untrue, the river was give that name long before Newflanders and I had an interest in the state. It works fine as a placeholder for the time being. Ruadh (talk) 12:28, 4 August 2019 (CEST)

I believe the river should be grandfathered in with the name Alormen river. /wangi (talk) 02:42, 20 August 2019 (CEST)

Me too.
Talk to Rhiney boi 02:46, 20 August 2019 (CEST)

River 3 Committee

Considering the location of the river, and with Huntington being included in the watershed for the river, I think the name we choose for the river should have some backstory. Should we go with a name that comes from indigenous peoples, or should the name come from colonizers? ---PColumbus73 (talk) 04:03, 12 June 2019 (CEST)
I think "Imperial River" is a good name - because it was the frontier of the former colonial imperium. What did the other think, that we can give the river a name now. Or which other name seems better? --Histor (talk) 19:04, 28 July 2019 (CEST)
No other meaning? Go on, folks - give poor river 3 a name --Histor (talk) 12:17, 31 July 2019 (CEST)

And not only that - in Saint Jacobs the river seemed to fork: one branch via Ancora to Anne Abbey (Newlynn), which seemed to be the officical version (see this page) and one via Merceica to Vandalia (Aperia). Dear mappers in the north of New Carnaby: Have an eye to river 3 please. --Histor (talk) 13:03, 1 August 2019 (CEST)

I like all the suggestions so far, any of them would be a good fit. Personally I prefer native names since a great deal of the naming of towns/cities/built environment will be English etc derived. I suggested Roanache River & Osnare River because I feel they would add interest and give a unique atmosphere to the map. We can create any back story we like for such a name. Ruadh (talk) 12:28, 4 August 2019 (CEST)

"Roanache" sounds well. Why not? --Histor (talk) 12:37, 4 August 2019 (CEST)

What about the Sir Hewitt, Flynn, Bluegill, or Kittiwake? --PColumbus73 (talk) 03:27, 17 August 2019 (CEST)
Bluegill has a nice ring to it and it's a freshwater species native to North America. Roanache could be an indigenous name for the same fish. So we can have a current English name and an older native name. Ruadh (talk) 12:11, 17 August 2019 (CEST)

Til now no meaning from AR120-18 and Gilliad for a name. It was time enought, to say something to this naming.

So let us see, what we have: Bluegill from Ruadh (for New Carnaby), myself (for New Carnaby) and PColumbus (Newlynn). Roanache is named by Logan230 (for Aperia) on the Forum-discussion and by Ruadh - as indigene name for "Bluegill". Some other names are stated only one time.

In the New Carnaby part we then will name the river "Bluegill River" as ingherish name and "Roanache River" as indigene Name. The mapper of the other parts of the river may do so in the same way. --Histor (talk) 00:44, 1 September 2019 (CEST)

How far will the Bluegill River be navigable? And what kind of vessels would be primarily traversing the river? Pleasure boats, or cargo barges, or smaller ships? I think it would be helpful for my state to establish a minimum height for fixed-span bridges. --PColumbus73 (talk) 04:52, 21 September 2019 (CEST)
The Bluegill River at Moama (boundary to Gilliad) is broad 300 m - there it may be deep 3, 4 or 5 m. I do not think, that this is enought for greater seagoing vessels. From Moama to Huntington on the Yarrow-river I think smaller freight ships (deepgoing to 1,5 m or so) can move to Huntington, p.e. with coal for the power-stations.
So, I'm thinking a minimum bridge height of between 65-100 feet (20-30m). The Intracoastal Waterway along the U.S. East Coast has a depth of around 12ft (4m), the bridges that cross it have an average height of about 65ft (20m). The waterway is mostly used by recreational boaters. Some of the bridges that cross the Ohio River have a height of around 100ft (30m) and handles more freight vessels. It sounds like establishing a minimum height would be necessary for the Yarrow and possibly the Wiltham River as well. --PColumbus73 (talk) 17:12, 22 September 2019 (CEST)
What sort of ships you will let sail on the Bluegill River? And I think, in the Yarrow River can sail only "inland"-ships, means ships only using rivers and canals, but no seagoing ships. For such "inland"-ships with three layers of container you need 7.80 m between Water and bridge - better 8 m / 25 or 26 feet (so on the Rhine, one of the rivers with heavy ship-transportation in Europe). I do not think, that in America container are bigger.--Histor (talk) 23:27, 22 September 2019 (CEST)
The average depth of the Ohio River is about 15ft (5m), and is about 19ft (6m) where it meets the Mississippi River. Most of the cargo transport is handled by barges and towboats. Although, steamboats from the 19th -20th Centuries could have been as high as 100ft. It's hard to say regarding pleasure boats since there is a wide variety. I recently added the Burton Greer Bridge (Newlynn Route 27) east of Hoyt, drawing it with a main span of 65 feet (20m) over the Wiltham River. I'd like to hear what @iBallisticWolf's plans are for transportation along the river into his state. For the Yarrow and Wiltham, 65 feet seems reasonable given the width of the two rivers. I'm not sure what New Carnaby or Gilliad's plans for river transport, but I think a high bridge span (65ft/20m minimum) would be necessary from Saint Jacobs to the ocean.--PColumbus73 (talk) 00:57, 23 September 2019 (CEST)

I do not think, that in the New Carnaby part of the Bluegill River will be seen seagoing ships. In Gilliad it may be - there BallisticWolf can say something. Inside Huntington District Bridges may be 8 or 10 m. --Histor (talk) 01:32, 23 September 2019 (CEST)

Until we can gather a consensus with Wilthamshire and Gilliad, Newlynn's bridge height requirements will be as follows:

Bluegill River from Anne Abbey to Moama: 100 feet (30 meters) Yarrow River from Moama to Hoyt: 65 feet (20 meters) Yarrow River from Hoyt to Huntington Border: 40 feet (12 meters) Wiltham River from Hoyt to Wilthamshire Border: 65 feet (20 meters)

A bridge that cannot meet these requirements shall be movable. --PColumbus73 (talk) 02:04, 23 September 2019 (CEST)

Range A Committee

Obviously, there's not going to be very many major native tribes actually living in these mountains. Maybe the range can be a demonym of a mountain or sky god that a certain tribe adjacent to the mountains worshipped, or something along those lines?
--Megacity2005Creator (talk) 19:18, 12 June 2019 (CEST)
Also- do we have a quorum now? --Megacity2005Creator (talk) 03:45, 12 September 2019 (CEST)
Y'all should, 9/17 is more than quorum requirements. Talk to Rhiney boi 04:20, 12 September 2019 (CEST)

Range B Committee

The state that was listed as AR120-38 is actually AR120-18. --Yoyo21 (talk) 15:09, 30 June 2019 (CEST)

Lake System Committee

Lake 1 Committee

Considering AR120-51 is the only Federal State not occupied for this committee and I believe it's reserved for a collaborative territory if I'm thinking of the right one, it seems like it might be a good time to move forward in figuring out a name for this lake, as long as/as soon as owners of newly occupied states like Arbenon have wiki access. --Ernestpcosby (talk) 12:08, 14 January 2020 (CET)

I would be pleased to see this lake finally named. I have no strong preferences, but whatever the name becomes, I assume it would be a name used over-and-over for streets and such in Makaska (cf. use of the name "Michigan" in nearby states, like Chicago's Michigan Avenue).--Luciano (talk) 17:27, 14 January 2020 (CET)

I agree - AR120-51 is reserved, but all the other owners can agree a name collectively. /wangi (talk) 17:36, 14 January 2020 (CET)

My personal preference of the suggested names is Lake Majestueux. With this being the one lake that shares a lot of the border with Ardencia along one of the areas with the most Franquese influence, I think this one particularly makes sense to have a Franquese name. Majestuex is also one of the prettier and easier to pronounce names listed, and "majestic water" seems like a good name for the largest lake. If I may as owner of Seneppi, I'd like to take Lake Seneppi out of consideration considering the name came from "two waters" and was to basically mean "between the lakes", lol. --Ernestpcosby (talk) 10:04, 16 January 2020 (CET)
bumping this convo --Ernestpcosby (talk) 23:23, 22 January 2020 (CET)

Lake 2 Committee

Personally, I believe that we should postpone a decision on the naming of this lake until one of the two state vacancies are filled. --Yoyo21 (talk) 03:01, 14 June 2019 (CEST)

Lake 3 Committee

Lake 4 Committee

This seems like it'll probably be the easiest one to decide since there's only 3 of us right now and at max 4 of us, and that all three of us (me, oof boi, and TheMayor) have had some sort of conversation about our plans in the past. Figured I'd get the conversation started. --Ernestpcosby (talk) 00:49, 13 June 2019 (CEST)

Three of the four individual lake name options are directly related to my state, so if there are names from the generic list y’all also want to consider, or if anyone has new ideas, please add them. -TheMayor (talk) 02:10, 13 June 2019 (CEST)
Just to be clear, would that be adding them by suggesting here? Or adding to the list of options? --Ernestpcosby (talk) 02:37, 13 June 2019 (CEST)
Also, I guess out of those four so far, the only one I explicitly am not a huge fan of is Lake Davis, which sounds a little generic. Sauganaush sounds the most unique of those but Lake Walkegan and Lake Minnonigan do make sense considering the neighboring states. (I find it funny that Lake Seneppi was suggested for a lake that doesn't touch Seneppi...) --Ernestpcosby (talk) 02:37, 13 June 2019 (CEST)
I’d say add any new ideas here or in the list; there’s only three of us so we can probably keep this pretty casual. In Minnonigan history, Sauganash was a friendly Native Archantan who helped the first non-native settlers in Minnonigan; however, he was wrongly accused of setting fire to a fort near Lake City and fled via canoe under cover of darkness into the lake, never to be seen again (although he likely ended up either on Barba Island or down to Patrio). So on one hand there could be a good story for Lake Sauganash to go with the name, but it’d also be unlikely that the lake was unnamed prior to those events. -TheMayor (talk) 06:38, 13 June 2019 (CEST)
I'm sorry about adding Seneppi under the wrong submissions, I corrected it.
Talk to Rhiney boi 17:37, 13 June 2019 (CEST)
It's okay, Rhiney boi. Thanks though.
I was actually going to say that Seneppi probably isn't a great name for a lake anyway because it roughly translates to "two waters" or "two lakes", lol. The name was supposed to represent Seneppi's location between lake 2 and lake 4. So it probably wouldnt make sense as a name for one of the lakes. --Ernestpcosby (talk) 18:11, 13 June 2019 (CEST)
I do really like the Sauganash backstory, but you make a good point about it probably not having been unnamwd before then. Would it be realistic for the lake to have changed names, or would it likely be using a name used already by natives pre-settlement? I think that will help determine our next steps --Ernestpcosby (talk) 18:14, 13 June 2019 (CEST)
It could've had one of the more generic lake names from the age of exploration (like Lake Grand or Lake Remarkable or Lake [explorer name]) which later got renamed out of (white) guilt. Could also be "Little Lake [Lake 1]" assuming the lakes are hydrologically connected through Seneppi. -TheMayor (talk) 20:38, 13 June 2019 (CEST)
Hm, valid points. Considering it'll be a Grand Lake probably best to let it not just be "Little (Lake 1)". But I like the idea of early name and then the renaming. I wonder what oof boi thinks. *summons oof boi* --Ernestpcosby (talk) 03:47, 15 June 2019 (CEST)
I like the idea of the lake having an early named and then getting renamed to something else. I think that the lake's early name would be something generic then it would have been changed back to a native name to honor then or something. Overall though, I like that idea. -Oof boi (talk) 13:12, 27 June 2019 (CEST)
It sounds like all three of us like the idea of the lake having an early generic name and then getting changed to a native name later on. That sounds like a good way to proceed. Personally I think Sauganash makes a lot of sense for the later native name especially considering the story of him disappearing into the lake, and sounds like something that could be a Grand Lake name. But that's just me. I don't have an immediate preference as far as the earlier generic names go. --Ernestpcosby (talk) 18:10, 27 June 2019 (CEST)
If we're in agreement on the overall concept then, I'd recommend one of the generic Franquese lake names from earlier Franquese expeditions of the area (perhaps Lake Bellefleur?) before the name changes to Lake Sauganash in the late 1800s. -TheMayor (talk) 18:27, 27 June 2019 (CEST)
It depends on the original country that founded the like. Although it would be better if the lake translated to something about a lake in franquese. Another idea is if the lake was named after someone who discovered it. -Oof boi (talk)
Lake Poole?
Talk to Rhiney boi 20:44, 27 June 2019 (CEST)
It sounds like for the most part the three of us here (TheMayor, myself, and Oof Boi) are in agreement about the current name being Lake Sauganash. So that seems like something we can move ahead on, though we should probably shoot Dimitrij a message before the final decision is made since Insumah was claimed partway through this discussion. Personally I think Lake Bellefleur works well as the original more generic Franquese name, or maybe Lake Marset if it's supposed to sound more like the name of a Franquese explorer. --Ernestpcosby (talk) 02:03, 25 July 2019 (CEST)
Lake Marset (maybe Marsette?) works for me. -TheMayor (talk) 02:51, 25 July 2019 (CEST)
Last call for objections before I officially change the name to Lake Sauganash. -TheMayor (talk) 06:19, 14 August 2019 (CEST)

Lake 5 Committee

Shouldn't the collaborative territory be Mennowa, not New Carnaby? --Megacity2005Creator (talk) 19:23, 12 June 2019 (CEST)

Yes, that’s my bad. I’ll make the switch. -TheMayor (talk) 20:19, 12 June 2019 (CEST)

My suggestion for naming this lake Lake Leighton comes from the current city of Leighton, Tulpanen. Leighton is intended to be an old port city on the mouth of the Leighton River, and Leighton is also one of the oldest cities on the lake. --Yoyo21 (talk) 03:01, 14 June 2019 (CEST)

I added Bānāshīka, which is one of my future (AR120-44) state's tribal words for "Lake".

Talk to Rhiney boi 20:54, 27 June 2019 (CEST)

If we were to select this option, I think we should simply write the word out as simply "Banashika" to make it simpler when writing wiki articles or referring to it on the forums. --Yoyo21 (talk) 15:13, 30 June 2019 (CEST)
A different angilicalization (did I spell that right) could be Banasheeka, since ī sounds like ee in English.
Talk to Rhiney boi 16:32, 30 June 2019 (CEST)

To restart this discussion, my favorites of the generic names are:

  • Wanalona
  • Quinnapoag
  • Poaxiwinnac
  • Abeta
  • Zihnoa
  • Cirtanea
  • Halsey

And for the individual lake 5 names:

  • Leighton
  • Talawaskee
  • Bānāshīka (or Banasheeka)

Thoughts? --Yoyo21 (talk) 03:43, 9 September 2019 (CEST)

Not gonna lie, these generic names are pretty good.
Leighton and Banasheeka make the most sense in the historical/native sense, and Talawaskee has a nice ring to it.
My favorites from the ones you have picked out are:
  • Lake Quinnapoag (Kwin-na-poh-ag?)
  • Lake Poaxiwinnac (Poh-ax-se-win-nac?)
  • Lake Leighton
  • Lake Talwaskee
Talk to Rhiney boi 03:53, 9 September 2019 (CEST)
I'd go for Poaxiwinnac or Leighton. Thinking about it now, "Talawaskee" is going to remind me too much of "Tallahassee". --Yoyo21 (talk) 01:04, 12 September 2019 (CEST)
I know that you're not going to leave any time soon, but I'd prefer if we went for a name that wouldn't have the meaning jeapordized if somebody left. On a different note, Lake Leighton rolls off the tounge much better than Lake Poaxiwinnac.
Talk to Rhiney boi 01:50, 12 September 2019 (CEST)
Long time, no talk. Back at the 14th of September, I messaged plainoldbread about the two names we had narrowed down the selection to on an app that is off-site, and he said Lake Leighton sounds best. Should we rename it now, or change it once he comes on here and agrees?
Talk to Rhiney boi 18:40, 10 November 2019 (CET)
It does not seem like we last discussed this 2 months ago, time flies! Since who knows if he'll come to this page, I think I'll PM him about it. What about the Mennowa coordinators? I don't think they've said anything about this either. --Yoyo21 (talk) 01:28, 11 November 2019 (CET)
They haven't said anything, but we only need 3 people (out of 5) to choose a name, IIRC. Looks like -51 will be a collab also, so we might be the only 3 owners.
Talk to Rhiney boi 02:38, 11 November 2019 (CET)
Plainoldbread agrees with Leighton as the lake name, so I will rename it now. --Yoyo21 (talk) 23:13, 11 November 2019 (CET)

Other discussion

Natural features should be decided on by the nation?

I thought we agreed that natural features should be decided on by the nation? That's at least how Isleno set it up to be.
Talk to Rhiney boi 02:39, 12 June 2019 (CEST)
Some people in the forums said that the locals should have more of a say. This solution seems to work fine, imo.--Fluffr Nuttr (talk) 03:01, 12 June 2019 (CEST)
Anyone on OGF can offer suggestions, but seems to make the most sense that the people who actually have to do the mapping should be the ones who get to pick what the various features are called. -TheMayor (talk) 03:38, 12 June 2019 (CEST)
Talk to Rhiney boi 03:41, 12 June 2019 (CEST)
I don't know if everyone has this problem, but you'll need to zoom in or out of the minimap to see its respective river.
--Megacity2005Creator (talk) 19:15, 12 June 2019 (CEST)

About consistency and verisimilitude

My - very general - concern is that we rather discuss about names (which are, I'm sorry, not interesting and can be replaced at any time) than discuss about where and how mountains/river are placed. By looking on the map I cannot get rid of the impression that mappers randomly draw something which does not fit together. Instead of using the sketches to discuss where mountain ranges are and adding details there is nothing done so far, am I wrong? (yes, I know, some territories are working rather on their topo than on motorways!)--Mstr (talk) 15:45, 28 July 2019 (CEST)

Name selection for smaller rivers

What would be the criteria for selecting names for smaller rivers shared by two or more states? Within Sierra there are two shared with other states, one of which ends up forming part of my state's border (and leads to a tripoint). Brunanter (talk) 02:17, 14 January 2020 (CET)

I guess you talk with the owner of the two states with which you share a river, discuss possible names, and finalize a river name.
IiEarth (talk) 07:44, 25 January 2020 (CET)