Talk:Thornton Creek

message: Summary: + ft, + cit so cl, rephrased, + cite web, + headings; see Talk. Explication: Added verified short full text (ft), added citations so cleaned up, rephrased per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:MoS) so conguent with respect to (wrt) sources, added cite web template, added headings Habitat, Neighborhoods of, and See also; see Discussion. Existing writing was retained as much as could. Cf. (see also) Talk:Seattle, Citing sources.
References having authors have conventional short form citation: [Author last name, {etc. if more than one}], [page numbers], with complete reference in Bibliography, less page numbers.
"External Links" -> "Further Reading", per MoS Further reading/external links.
"Retrieved [date]", since on-line reference links can break, (per Embedded links).
--GoDot 09:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The claim in the lede that Haller Lake is a source for Thornton Creek is unsourced, and contradicts at least one watershed map. Please feel free to contribute to a discussion of this topic at Talk:Haller Lake, Seattle#Thornton Creek.—Myasuda (talk) 04:25, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The links at  and  show that Haller Lake's watershed is disjoint from Thornton Creek. From this evidence, as well as the other links provided at Talk:Haller Lake, Seattle#Thornton Creek, I'll proceed to remove the statement that "Its source is Haller Lake" from the article.—Myasuda (talk) 01:18, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Haller Lake 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Thornton Creek. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20041115140056/http://awdevelopment.com:80/Grounds/wetland.html to http://www.awdevelopment.com/Grounds/wetland.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121230140303/https://www.seattle.gov/util/EnvironmentConservation/Projects/DrainageSystem/Meadowbrook&ThorntonCreek/MeadowbrookPondBackground/index.htm to http://www.seattle.gov/util/EnvironmentConservation/Projects/DrainageSystem/Meadowbrook&ThorntonCreek/MeadowbrookPondBackground/index.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:44, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Thornton Creek. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121230140303/https://www.seattle.gov/util/EnvironmentConservation/Projects/DrainageSystem/Meadowbrook&ThorntonCreek/MeadowbrookPondBackground/index.htm to http://www.seattle.gov/util/EnvironmentConservation/Projects/DrainageSystem/Meadowbrook&ThorntonCreek/MeadowbrookPondBackground/index.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://students.washington.edu/mwarrenw/nscc_trail/
*Added  tag to http://www.nwlink.com/~sunnywww/WhereView-WNW-Birds-PugetSound.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:47, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: 200,000 people in the watershed sounds awfully high: that would be roughly 1/3 of the city. Has someone got a more specific citation for that (e.g. a quoted, specific statement)? - Jmabel | Talk 00:51, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: 75,000, it's not a great article so if you see something wrong feel free to improve it. Always beleive in hope (talk) 23:33, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Human population 

message: Why is there a references and a bibliography? and more importantly why are is there a different reference for every tributary source? I'm not sure what to do about the reference problems because I don't want to remove the references with information actually in the article but it's a real mess. Always beleive in hope (talk) 23:43, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  References a mess