Whilst it could be that the editor or author are technically wrong it’s also quite possible that they might be technically correct and were just arguing semantics here.

As far as geography/geology/hydrology goes rivers have a specific definition which the grand canal might not fit especially as one big system since afaik it extends and connects to multiple rivers and the water doesn’t flow in a single direction into a larger body of water.

Each contiguous part of the Grand Canal only flows in one direction, it would be impossible for it to work otherwise.

You do have a point though that this new river in Egypt may be the 'largest' on some other metric.

The issue isn’t direction but rather having multiple branches as a river only includes the main channel going downstream from a single point.

For example the Mississippi and Ohio river are considered different rivers even though their waters mix and both flow downstream through the same channel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio_River, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippi_River

According to this definition then Iraq’s man-made river (Saddam’s river) is longer at 565 km. the official role of the river was to collect irrigation water from Mesopotamia fertile land all the way to the Persian Gulf, though the real reason Saddam built it was to dry the Arab Marshes as it was difficult to contain the rebels in the marshes. https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%A8...

I thought most of that 565km distance was an existing waterway.

In English: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draining_of_the_Mesopotamian_M...

I think the distinction the authors are making - correctly or not, I’m not sure, plenty of rivers don’t flow to the sea - is this artificial river flows into the sea, not into other canals or rivers.

The grand canal connects the Yellow and Yangtze rivers, for example.

Maybe it is by total volume or flow rate

I don't think a canal that's split by locks would qualify as a river that's running in one direction all the way

I don't think locks are the reason it wouldn't count. Otherwise the Thames would end at Teddington.

So you're saying these Egyptians are in de nile?

Sarcasm like this is technically against HN policy but this made my day. Thanks for the laugh.

That is not sarcasm. Not all jokes are sarcasm.

I have been to the cloak room and got your coat.

Lines like that are best kept in your Dad-a-base.

>There are indeed several man-made rivers longer then this so it's unclear what the editors were thinking with this headline.

There's one underground that's even longer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delaware_Aqueduct

Currently China is building a new project: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South%E2%80%93North_Water_Tran... which I believe is larger.