User talk:Lunsenses

The definition you were trying to add to watershed is already covered by the US definition. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 16:42, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


 * But actually it is not. The US definition only covers the water flow, leaving away the nutrients, sediments (and of course, social factors) that are also part of the watersheds.Lunsenses (talk) 17:21, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


 * If the flow of pollutants was not within the boundaries of the watershed, or if the farmers and fishermen weren't connected, it would still be a watershed. We're not trying to intricately denote every aspect of it; that's Wikipedia's job. The water flow is the only aspect that actually defines it. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 18:27, 24 February 2013 (UTC)