Talk:Sea of Cortez Fishery

This should be a section in Gulf of California, unless it's conceivable that there will be lots of links to this independently of the general Gulf article. Stan 16:08, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I would generally agree, but I think this might be an exception. I started this article at the request of an existing community that wants to create an extensive article specifically about the Sea of Cortez fishery. The content they're assembling is significantly more than the existing content for the Gulf of California overall. As a Wiki novice, though, I'm certainly open to suggestions. --Sharkbait 19:07, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Depends on the length and linking, which in turns depends on energy level. Articles can go to 5,000 words before they start to seem "too long" and want to be split up. Also, at 320,000+ articles, new ones have a way of being lost in the noise and never being seen again - it's sad to see an article that hasn't been touched for two years because nobody knows it's there. So in the fishery case you want to have links into the content, for instance from "Gulf of California", from relevant fish taxa, from general fishing topics, from articles about towns along the shore, etc. In many cases those articles won't exist; go ahead and create them even if they're short initially, they'll connect from Mexico and its sub-articles. Heavily-interlinked articles not only get more attention from within WP, but also come out closer to the top of Google searches, which is nice. Think about how you want new readers to find this info; for instance, I've done some description of types of fish, but rarely have much detail on ranges beyond "Atlantic" or "Indo-Pacific" - how do I find what species are even in the Sea of Cortez, and how they're fished? Lots of ways to connect the specialized subject into general knowledge! (Don't forget pics too, we're perennially short of illustrations that people on the other side of the planet can look at to see what things are like there.) Stan 20:58, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

In no way do I want to denigrate the efforts of Sharkbait and his pals, but until this gets a lot longer, there's no reason why it shouldn't be in Gulf of California, under some suitable subheader; that article's barely more than a stub, anyway. At the very least, it should be linked to from there. And I'm looking forward to reading about the Vaquita and the Totuaba! (Totuava? sp?). –Hajor 00:22, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I've moved the content to Gulf of California under a new subhead, and created a redirect. It does make sense to put it there at least until the content begins to overwhelm the more general article. Thanks for all the input! --Sharkbait 17:05, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)