Talk:Amur

China High‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles 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.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Russia: Physical geography Top‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the physical geography of Russia task force.

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

Northeast

Re: ... across northeast Asia for over 4400 km (2,700 mi), from the mountains of northeastern China to the Sea of Okhotsk (near Nikolayevsk-na-Amure).

Isn't this supposed to be northwestern China — it's all in North China, but traces an arc concave down from the East at the Sea, Westwards to Mongolia. User:Fabartus || Talkto_FrankB 29 June 2005 03:50 (UTC)

No, it is definitely northeastern China. China as it exists today extends well west of Mongolia, the Amur watershed includes eastern Mongolia and most of what was known as Manchuria. Fire Star 29 June 2005 03:53 (UTC)

This link seems to be down:

http://www.prognozadvisor.ru/pages/amurobleng.html

Is it better to check it? --82.58.202.136 21:16, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

This page was moved from Amur River to Heilong-Amur River without prior discussion. I am requesting that the page should be moved back to Amur River on the grounds that this is the most widely accepted name in English. "Heilong-Amur River" is not a widely used name.

Bathrobe (talk) 11:42, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The following is a discussion about the move of the page which occurred before the Request for Move notice was posted:

Why was this page moved without discussion? I personally have never seen the river referred to as the "Heilong-Amur River". Was this name made up by the editor moving? Or does it have wider acceptance? (A quick Google actually suggests that Amur-Heilong is more common than Heilong-Amur). Also, I would like to challenge the notion that the name changes part way down the river. There is a big stretch where it could arguably be called by both names, Chinese and Russian. The usual name in English is the Russian one. There seems to be no reason (other than some kind of sentiment that "this is a Chinese river, it should be called by the Chinese name) to start calling it the Heilong. Bathrobe (talk) 08:22, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's the only way to contain both names. List of medieval Mongolian tribes and I didn't use the name because Heilong river is located in the upper reaches (though not riverhead). --虞おそれ海うみ (Yú Hǎi) (talk) 10:29, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should use an aboriginal name - Chinese, Manchu, Mongolian, all are ok, because all of these people has lived with this river for a long history and cultivated related cultures - all of these names are cultural name except Amur. --虞おそれ海うみ (Yú Hǎi) (talk) 10:32, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't really matter whether you think that "we should use an aboriginal name". As far as I understand, the policy on Wikipedia is to use the name that is generally used in English. That means that, no matter how unsatisfied you may be with the way things are or how well reasoned the grounds for your preference are, you can't impose your own personal ideas on Wikipedia articles. You need sources to show that "Heilong-Amur" is the generally accepted name in English.

A quick Google search (which only gives a rough approximation of English usage but is a useful start) shows:

Amur River: 77,600
Heilong River: 4,060 (includes "Amur/Heilong River")
Heilongjiang River: 5,860 (Chinese web sites are rather prominent)
Amur-Heilong River: 832
Amur-Heilongjiang River: 102
Heilongjiang-Amur River: 409
Heilong-Amur River: 61

No matter how you cut it, Amur River is the dominant name. I propose that this page should be reverted to its original name.

Bathrobe (talk) 11:02, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I missed this discussion when I was moving the article back, but after reviewing the comments above, I stand by my decision. The river is predominantly known in English as Amur; that's the only name listed in every major English dictionary one would care to consult, so that's the only name that truly complies with WP:UE. If anyone disagrees with this assessment of mine, please file a move request from "Amur River" to "Heilong-Amur River", not move it unilaterally and then have people jump through the hoops trying to move it back where it belonged in the first place.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 03:18, March 14, 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Amur River. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:59, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Amur River. 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/20090223115421/http://www.ethnonet.ru/ru/pub/14-11-08.html to http://www.ethnonet.ru/ru/pub/14-11-08.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://amur-heilong.net/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:04, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Amur River. 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/20120812063401/http://webworld.unesco.org/water/ihp/db/shiklomanov/part'4/FORMER%20USSR/RUSSIA/Amur%20at%20Komsomolsk.html to http://webworld.unesco.org/water/ihp/db/shiklomanov/part'4/FORMER%20USSR/RUSSIA/Amur%20at%20Komsomolsk.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:50, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

I notice that the article makes a point of mentioning that the river would often just be called "water" and that multiple nearby languages have similar words for that. However, the Mongolian word "mörön" is more commonly translated as "river", not just "water" ("us" is usually cited as the word for "water"). Does/did "mörön" carry that simpler meaning too, or is the writer of that part of the article trying to make associations of words with similar as opposed to identical meaning (in which case the wording would be wrong, since not all three words mean "water")? It might be worth noting that the source was published in 1980 and that the Altaic theory was still very much alive back then.

Also, on a slightly related topic, the etymology given in the infobox is nowhere to be found in the article, so that might require some clarification.

AnonymousMusician (talk) 20:53, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]