Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scottish Islands/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Naming conventions

There is a request for input from WPSI members at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements)#Scotland guidelines. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 20:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Prods

I have prodded Hilton, Argyll and Bute and in my view Hilton, Orkney is in a similar category (i.e. it is a farm or a small group of houses not a 'village'). However, those who know Shapinsay may have a view on this. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 19:10, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The author of Hilton, Bute is contesting my logic. Nothing daunted I have prodded Biruaslum. It's a small island, not a village, but I can't see it ever making an article. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 21:52, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The hilton articles have been unprodded. You'll have to nominate them through AfD if you want them gone. Lurker (said · done) 14:35, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and there is only one real village on Shapinsay- Balfour. Lurker (said · done) 14:36, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I only prodded the Bute one. It might be handy to have an 'Articles for deletion' heading on the main page. I'll stick one up and see how it goes. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 17:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with Proddies, it's only a minority who are small minded. (Joke). Personally I don't have a huge problem with these places having articles, after all, many of them were there ten years ago, and will be there in ten years time, which is more than can be said for some of the ephemera on wikipedia. Sodom, Shetland (really "Sudheim" - thanks again OS!) is notable partly because of its name, and the Hugh MacDiarmid connection which has meant it is mentioned in many books, but it isn't a big place.

It would be best to turn these articles into redirects, if anything, rather than blanking the pages. This could be done with some of the "villages" in South Uist. --MacRusgail (talk) 18:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Well feel free to remove the prod from Biruaslum, plus all the text and add something about its actual status. I fear it won't get much beyond a stub. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 22:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I have been studying Shapinsay a bit, and there is at least one other place which could be considered a settlement - Sandgarth in the south east. It appears on several maps, with a number of houses marked. I have turned Biruaslum into a stack... and removed the prod. --MacRusgail (talk) 15:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I suspect Burrastow is less of a village and more of a farm. Burwick even more so. Any comments? Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 21:31, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I have amended both articles, enlarging on their actual nature and removing references to 'villages'. The OS Gazetteer would seem to be a rather sloppy source and I fear there are more hidden away in our stubs. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 12:06, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

3RR + Vandalism - Barra & Stornoway

One user has been responsible for vandalism and reversions on Barra, there has been a 3RR report on Barra here. I'd be quite grateful of any additional input, particularly if there are any administrators who can block the user.MRM (talk) 18:31, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I notice this egregious vandal was given a 24 hour block. I fear he/she/it will be back. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 21:52, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

There's a lot of vandalism going on, and in such cases, it's worth listing it on our front page in the section "Pages prone to POV pushing, vandalism, or that otherwise need watching" or on the WP Scotland equivalent. --MacRusgail (talk) 18:05, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Oppose merge of Midgarth

Perhaps the Midgarth page should not be merged with Linga Holm. It seems that each page has sound sources and has a distinct character. It is also much more helpful to our encylclopaedia when an in-link comes to a unique topic not an amalgam. Cheers. Hadrianheugh (talk) 00:11, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the first question is: are they one and the same? Scotgaz seems to think so calling the island "Linga Holm (Midgarth Holm)". I can't see any obvious evidence that they are different. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 08:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I think we should tread carefully, since it is not the first small islands have been confused. Perhaps ask an Orcadian who's up on these things?--MacRusgail (talk) 18:13, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

If there are clearly the same, then a merge is ok with me, but I have to agree with MacRusgail to tread carefully until we are sure. The issue of habitation seems to differentiate, but I don't really profess to know whether or not they are one and the same. Cheers. Hadrianheugh (talk) 22:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Checking OS maps, there's no sign of any island called Midgarth anywhere around there, so I suspect it is the same place. And the census reference seems to describe it as near Stronsay, as Linga Holm is. Plus the population figure given does much that in the Linga Holm article (6 people in 1841). Note that there is a small hamlet called Midgarth on mainland Orkney (and two in Shetland) - the map shows "Knowe of Midgarth" near this hamlet, which I assume is the knowe that the article refers to (and the Megalithic reference) - see HY3923. --Vclaw (talk) 03:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I am satisfied with the rendition of Vclaw, and a merge now sounds fine. We can always split later if contrary findings are made. Cheers. Hadrianheugh (talk) 14:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment - merges are better than deletes IMHO, at least the article goes somewhere.--MacRusgail (talk) 23:27, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I have merged Linga Holm into Midgarth. There is a case to be made for doing it the other way round, but I did it this way as there are so many other Lingas already. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 19:47, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to disagree with you - while I take the point about the Lingas, Midgarth is the northern part of Stronsay! It should be the Holm of Midgarth if anything. Go to Getmap to the third biggest circle on the zoom function, and look at Stronsay. Midgarth is marked next to Whitehall. --MacRusgail (talk) 21:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to swop them round - I am not at all attached to this outcome. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 09:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC) PS I am beginning to suspect further confusion. See 'Knowe of Midgarth' at HY398236 on the mainland, which looks more like the kind of structure mentioned. See also [1].

Fame

Does anyone know how Fame is defined for Wiki articles?

Personally, I feel that the list on Stornoway is a little over-populated with "famous" people that even someone from the town has never heard off. Is a youth-worker famous? Someone (with no account) keeps adding them. MRM (talk) 12:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements#Notable people for some suggestions. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 13:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

RfA

See Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Deacon of Pndapetzim. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 08:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Assessments

There are probably a few more articles out there without WPSI banners, but for now at least the business of assessing those we know about is all but done (see WP:IS/A). Hopefully the comments section will now come into its own - if you have suggestions as to how to improve the article please post them in the 'Article Grading' comments box. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 09:00, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to The Transhumanist the bug on the comments section seems to be fixed i.e. once one is created you can edit it via the Talk page. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 13:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Firths in Orkney and Shetland

The article "firth" makes no mention of the numerous firths in the Northern Isles, other than the Pentland Firth. Perhaps someone might like to take some time to fix it (if not, I'll get around to it at some point!) --MacRusgail (talk) 13:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Tarbert

Hello team,

There seems to be at least two pairs of East Loch Tarbert and West Loch Tarbert on the west side of Scotland. I discovered this is a problem when recently developing Tarbert, Argyll and Bute and found that the link to West Loch Tarbert is for Tarbert, Outer Hebrides! Does anybody have a suggestion on how to disambiguate these bodies of water? --Jza84 |  Talk  01:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Could be West Loch Tarbert and East Loch Tarbert as dab pages and then West Loch Tarbert, Argyll and West Loch Tarbert, Harris et seq, the non-dab articles having a

Not to be confused with West Loch Tarbert, Argyll.

etc. hat.

or

West Loch Tarbert & East Loch Tarbert for Harris and West Loch Tarbert, Argyll & East Loch Tarbert, Argyll, each having the hat per the above.

The former is more logical, but would require fixing about 15 links and creates two more dab pages in addition to:

Tarbert, Tarbet, Tarbert (disambiguation) and Tarbet (disambiguation), the last two being redirects.

Whichever is used, Tarbert (placename) (something of a cross between an article and a dab page) should be updated with all 4 lochs, as should Tarbert.

I'd go for the latter myself, simplicity trumping logic, but either would be OK. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 09:12, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd say there's no clear primary topic here, as both pairs of loch Tarberts are of about equal importance (note the pages currently linking to West Loch Tarbert are about evenly split in which one they should be referring to). So both pairs should be at disambiguated titles (I agree that 'Harris' and 'Argyll' are probably the best names for disambiguating). If you don't want to create more disambig pages you could make East Loch Tarbert and West Loch Tarbert both redirects to Tarbert (placename), and have links to the lochs there. --Vclaw (talk) 14:12, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Wouldn't the disambiguation go to council area rather than former county? I know this makes the titles rather lengthy, if not ugly (East Loch Tarbert, Argyll and Bute!) but the counties were abolished and settlements are not disambiguated to county either. Input welcome, --Jza84 |  Talk  23:21, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Argyll is a historic area that has had a variety of official statuses over the years, including county (and its currently a registration county). IMO its silly to say "East Loch Tarbert is in Argyll and Bute", when it is quite clearly in Argyll, and not in Bute at all. But I don't particularly care either way. I just think it is sometimes more sensible to use well known "areas" (or islands), instead of always using the council areas for disambiguation.(I know there was discussion going on re naming conventions for Scottish places, but I'm not sure if anything in particular was agreed with that). --Vclaw (talk) 23:46, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

No you make a fair point, I just wondered if there was to be any objection about this. I know WP:SCOTLAND and WP:UKGEO tend to avoid disambigation to counties and informal regions. Not meaning to explore this issue to its apex.... surely the bodies of water did not form part of these "land" territories anyway? Wouldn't something like East Loch Tarbert (Harris) (in brackets) therefore be more sensible? --Jza84 |  Talk  00:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

There are many. Tairbeart just means an isthmus. --MacRusgail (talk) 15:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Vclaw is of course correct about the primacy issue (although I don't think it is likely to be controversial in this case). I also agree that 'Argyll' is perfectly acceptable, and whilst brackets would work, commas have generally been used for Island articles and (so far as I know) for Scottish articles generally. I think we could reasonably argue that for these purposes the Western Isles, and by extension Harris, includes bodies of water adjacent to the land. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 18:53, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I have been trying to think of a way to make a light-hearted addition to this discussion without running the risk of being accused by someone with a sense of humour by-pass of attempting to avoid community policy. If you go to Commons and look for me there you'll see what I mean. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 20:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

See also Talk:Tarbert#Merger proposal. Ben MacDui 15:28, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

How Can You Help?

I have a minor concern that the complexity that the project offers is perhaps a shade confusing for newer users. I've created a new Wikipedia:WikiProject Scottish Islands/How You Can Help page linked to the main project template and will follow up with some related main project page tweaks asap. Improvements to this new page welcome of course. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 19:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

April & May collaborations

Sorry, I have taken a bit of a backseat for this month, as I have been busy elsewhere. Any suggestions for next month's collaboration?

I suggest going back to somewhere in Orkney, to keep the rotation going.

The Mainland, Orkney article is pretty pitiful, and should be linked up with the relevant pages. --MacRusgail (talk) 16:39, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Onybiddie oot there? --MacRusgail (talk) 18:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes - been busy and still haven't tidied up Skye. Happy to do look at Mainland, Orkney, although there is obviously a lot of scope for duplication of Orkney itself. I think it would be useful to have an agreed 'scope of works' if we're going there. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 08:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't have to be fantastically long. It really needs to link into the parishes properly, plus sites of interest etc.--MacRusgail (talk) 13:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

OK - I should have a bit of time this weekend. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 18:48, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

May

I notice that we have managed to avoid Na h-Eileanan Siar so far. Any suggestions? Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 08:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Church of St Clement, Rodel (something different)/Castlebay/Leverburgh (Leverhulme story is well documented and interesting)/Machair/Great Bernera

The Outer Hebrides (I refuse to call them the "Western Isles" - that's the Hebrides in general - see Dr Johnson etc!) got a lot of attention just prior to the start of WPSI, with Mingulay, St Kilda etc getting a lot of attention. I think for June, we could consider one of the Islands of the Forth, or - if possible - a freshwater island (difficult to get material on most of them. Neither of these have featured yet.--MacRusgail (talk) 14:51, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I know very little about these eastern and freshwater isles, but I'm willing to give it a bash if you want to make a suggestion. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 18:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd go for the Bass Rock - it's mentioned in RLS etc. --MacRusgail (talk) 13:28, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

OK - I do have some lighthouse related stuff. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 17:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

June

...is nearly upon us... we might go for some of the Outer Hebridean suggestions above.--MacRusgail (talk) 19:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

? June is now here, but no giant worms in sight. Any suggestions?--MacRusgail

I'm maybe a bit short of time this month - something not too taxing - Biruaslum :)? - or any of the above - or perhaps one of the Barra Isles. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 18:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm... that came up for deletion. Any decent sources available for expansion?--MacRusgail (talk) 15:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I fear not. I was pulling your leg per this trickster. I'd be quite happy with An t-Ob - unless you prefer a challenge at Brahan Seer - in quite an absurd state at present. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 11:26, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I did wonder... Come on, someone, make up our minds for us. I already dictated the last couple! --MacRusgail (talk) 13:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Great Bernera it is then. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 21:08, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

August & September

Probably time for the Shetland Islands again - I suggest West Burra or Jarlshof.--MacRusgail (talk) 17:35, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Jarlshof sounds good to me. Top class, still a stub, and plenty of available information. Ben MacDui 08:32, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Jarlshof it is then, as long as no one objects. Notable, interesting site, and Skara Brae's already been done... --MacRusgail (talk) 17:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Well that was quick! Any September suggestions? Ben MacDui 08:23, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Just hope it's not just you and me. You did almost all the work on the last one. :( --MacRusgail (talk) 15:46, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind at all - its great if folk chip in, but there is no harm done if not. Are we back at the Inner Hebrides now? Ben MacDui 16:13, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Portree? --MacRusgail (talk) 18:56, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

If you must, although Skye was the last one in this 'section'. Ben MacDui 19:19, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Gigha?--MacRusgail (talk) 21:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Great choice! See you there. Ben MacDui 07:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. There must be some decent stuff on the buy out somewhere. I have a book on the prehistory of the place in the house somewhere. If I can find it!!! I won't be active much for the next week or so, but will try something.--MacRusgail (talk) 18:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I see God's Islanders: The Story of Gigha by Catherine Czerkawska in the shops. I have some archive material too. Ben MacDui 18:19, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Good progress - not sure what to make of this Battle of Delgon business.

October

Anyone for Orkney? I'd really like to get round the rest of the WP: 0.7 stuff below as well so something straightforward. Suggestions:

• Tart up Orkney itself - should be easy to get to GA
• Any of the major neolithic monuments
• Westray or South Ronaldsay for some vin ordinaire. Ben MacDui 08:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

SR, although I may not be participating as much this month... --MacRusgail (talk) 12:15, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

OK - I'll be taking it easy myself, but I'll set up the flags when Gigha is tidied away. Ben MacDui 08:12, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Time ticks away and some of the remaining WP 0.7 copy edits look time consuming. I'm also away for a few days myself mid-month. Unless anyone is inspired I'll probably leave the change until about the 20th (when 0.7 needs to be in) and then SR can run through until the end of Nov. Ben MacDui 17:05, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

December

SR has crept along slowly and its time for a change of scene. The schedule suggests a trip to the west. Barra Head? Ben MacDui 18:40, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

January

Isle of Arran? --MacRusgail (talk) 17:31, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back, and a happy New Year. See also below.... Ben MacDui 18:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Aye same to yourself.--MacRusgail (talk) 21:21, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Preston Island

Preston Island nr Rosyth (NT0085) = another former island? --MacRusgail (talk) 19:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Possibly - is there any evidence other than the name? Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 17:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Some Geograph entries suggest that it was joined to the mainland by industrial infilling with ash...--MacRusgail (talk) 19:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Some info here and here with a map here. It is certainly not a current island, but may have been just under 200ha. Finavon (talk) 12:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Definitely not a current island, but I suppose should be included...--MacRusgail (talk) 13:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Are these images worth uploading?

Is this Hascosay in the background or not? http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/534293

Dunno - but not worth it in my view.

Fuidheigh/Wiay in the background (hilly part) http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/444083

Better than nowt.

Only a tiny bit of Sandray here. http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/83673

Not worth it.

Is this Sanndraigh to the left? http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/218857

I think so, with Flodaigh in the background. Not worth it for the former, yes for the latter (if we had an article) - although see below.

Can Linga, Muckle Roe be seen here or not? http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/181546 --MacRusgail (talk) 19:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Can't figure it out but I doubt that its close enough.

This one is a goodie for Bishop's Isles. http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/514170

Have you seen the OS Map Checksheet button on Geograph? Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 20:46, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

My favourite!

Another goodie.

Thanks, I appreciate your advice. The picture of the Bishop's Isles (only just) misses out Sandray - I have been using the OS checksheet! I use it sometimes to get pictures of islands, when they're out of the appropriate square. A view of an island in the distance can register miles away!

I have managed to get a number of lovely new pictures for islands, but one or two still lie frustratingly out of reach! Check 'em out! Was at Killin the other day, so that's how I know about the fascinating Inchbuie...--MacRusgail (talk) 21:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Good pictures. I confess I didn't know it existed. Have you tried Flickr? Some photos are ( I think) available e.g. http://www.flickr.com/photos/dreamisles/2501048833/ Nothing on Sandray tho' Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 21:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I find Flickr very hard to search personally. (I can't view the image thanks to being on an impossibly slow library computer just now!) I did manage to get a lot of pictures of places in the Falkland Islands off Flickr, but it annoys me that are "all rights reserved". Why bother? I've released tonnes of my own pictures into the public domain. If I don't want to, I don't put them on Flickr/Commons etc. --MacRusgail (talk) 13:26, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

A few Flickr images are available, but you are right - it is very frustrating not to be able to use them all. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 11:21, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I just found some excellent ones of Sandray and Wiay (both Wiays) - but I'm not allowed to upload them. Bummer...--MacRusgail (talk) 13:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 20:48, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Bernera Island

Checking on the links to Great Bernera there is one from Achanduin Castle on Lismore that allegedly overlooks the western Outer Hebrides. It is of course a bad link, but I fear that Bernera Island, a tidal companion of Lismore has previously overlooked our all-seeing gaze. It's about 25 ha in extent. I'll amend the castle link and add to the dab page. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 16:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Holm

A fine discussion has begun on my talk page about the use of Holm as a dab page. It may result in the creation of a new Holm (islet) or maybe Holm (island) page. If either of these links goes blue please feel free to start adding your favourites. Ben MacDui 10:48, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Garbh Eilean dab

There must be a clean-up drive going on. I have commented at User talk:Hoof Hearted. Ben MacDui 19:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure it is worth keeping the page, even if it can only be within the project. Finavon (talk) 19:23, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

That would be the best option. Keep the bureaucrats off it. --MacRusgail (talk) 20:24, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I stored the relevant diff at Requested articles. It would be easy enough to create a list, although the name might be a challenge: Garbh Eileans, Garbh Eileanach, List of Garbh Eileans? If no-one gets round to it soon, the project page option is just a couple of edits and QED. Ben MacDui 08:37, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I think these are "set index articles": a list article about a set of items of a specific type that share the same (or similar) name. See WP:SETINDEX, which goes on to say " If the disambiguation page carries the name of the term (as with Signal Mountain), then the set index article should be named "List of XXXs named YYY". "

In which case, the question is should Garbh Eilean be purloined, or is this a case for List of islands called ''Garbh Eilean''? I think the latter. Ben MacDui 07:59, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

List of islands called Garbh Eilean is now the first article in the exciting new Category:Scottish Island set index articles. Ben MacDui 20:23, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Holm (island) now also rescued from its DAB oblivion. It's not renamed. Ben MacDui 09:40, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Good to see Flodday, Vatersay. Flodday (disambiguation) would definitely be a candidate to be moved to "List of islands called Flodday." Ben MacDui 10:41, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 1691 articles are assigned to this project, of which 214, or 12.7%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place a template on your project page.

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:44, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

British Isles debate looming

I just came across a post at WP:GEOGRAPHY (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geography#Help needed!) on this subject. See in particular the proposed Template:Islands of the British Isles and related discussion at Talk:Terminology of the British Isles#Task force - first task... and related discussions above and below that. I can hardly wait. Ben MacDui 21:11, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for informing us. --MacRusgail (talk) 14:37, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Stats

Good news: Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Scottish Islands articles by quality statistics has nothing unassessed - thanks to all for attending to this.

On the other hand the info now provided at Wikipedia:WikiProject Scottish Islands/Cleanup listing is a shade daunting. Ben MacDui 08:45, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Western isles "flag"

Western Isles "Flag" for deletion - thought you may want to comment...MRM (talk) 12:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Good. I have been complaining about this for a while, and have put comments on it on wikimedia commons. Not only is it unknown to most islanders, but the teams in the Island Games use the birlinn flag, and there is pictorial evidence of this.--MacRusgail (talk) 15:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Scuttling of the German fleet in Scapa Flow

As noted on the WP:SCO project page the new article Scuttling of the German fleet in Scapa Flow is both a DYK and a GAC. However, there is considerable overlap between this article and the existing Gutter Sound. It may be that a merger of some kind is in order. Ben MacDui 18:53, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

GA Sweeps Reveiw for Dubh Artach

I just wanted to make certain that your project was aware that this article is on hold following its GA Sweeps Review, which can be found here. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 00:09, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Please all note: I had to do a fair amount of editing on both Dubh Artach and Staffa during the Sweeps as (unbeknownst to me - and indeed how would you know?) since August 2007 GA's are required to have page numbers for book refs. Everyone is therefore encouraged to use them wherever possible, especially for articles with any chance of GA status. More such reviews are inevitable. Ben MacDui 17:53, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Insular myth

I was trying to think of a bad joke about 'Mosdab' and 'Nogbad' so I looked at Noggin the Nog. Can it really be true that "visually, it was primarily inspired by the Lewis chessmen"? Ben MacDui 17:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, but the stuff about noggin being Brythonic is true. I've heard it elsewhere.--MacRusgail (talk) 17:14, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Scottish Islands

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:19, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

An interesting collection. Hebrides and Outer Hebrides stand out as being weak. Quite a task to review them all...... Ben MacDui 19:24, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Bot list

• Scottish Gaelic (talk) beyond scope
• British_Isles (talk) beyond scope
• St_Kilda,_Scotland (talk) FA and watched  Done
• Orkney  Done Would be quite a good article if it had about a hundred more references.
• Shetland  Done
• Skye (talk)  Done
• Scottish_Highlands (talk) beyond scope and needs considerable effort
• List_of_islands_of_Scotland (talk)  Done
• Lewis (talk)  Done
• Islay (talk)  Done
• Dál_Riata (talk)  Done
• Iona (talk)  Done
• Jacobitism (talk) beyond scope
• Staffa (talk) Recent GA sweep  Done
• Outer_Hebrides (talk)  Done
• Haakon_IV_of_Norway (talk)  Done
• Harris (talk)  Done
• History_of_Scotland (talk) beyond scope
• Hebrides (talk)  Done - although C class and still in need of attention
• Charles_Edward_Stuart (talk)  Done except for one fact tag
• Raasay (talk)  Done
• Alexander_III_of_Scotland (talk) beyond scope
• Samuel_Johnson (talk) Currently at FAC  Done
• Stornoway (talk)  Done
• Rùm (talk)  Done
• HMS_Royal_Oak_(08) (talk)  Done quick check only as its an FA
• Loch_Lomond (talk)  Done
• Rockall (talk)  Done
• Scottish_clan (talk) beyond scope
• Columba (talk)  Done
• Highland_Clearances (talk)  Done
• Scapa_Flow (talk)  Done
• Argyll_and_Bute (talk)  Done text is fine, but its mostly lists
• Mainland,_Orkney (talk)  Done
• Firth_of_Forth (talk)  Done - although 3 sections are just lists
• Ulva (talk)  Done
• Shapinsay (talk)  Done
• Harald_I_of_Norway (talk)  Done
• Isle_of_Arran (talk) copy edited - trivia section moved  Done
• Lerwick (talk)  Done
• Isle_of_Mull (talk)  Done - though still weak in places

Suggestions for other articles

• Jarlshof
• Mingulay
• Prehistoric Orkney

Waiting for the Gift of Sound and Vision

• Material copied from Talk:Tarbert (placename)

I'd prefer the sound recording idea myself, anyone know how to upload one?--MacRusgail (talk) 21:02, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

LOL. Yes, I've uploaded sound files before, I'll try and do one for Tairbeart before then end of the week, bear with me I'm a tad busy tomorrow. Akerbeltz (talk) 21:41, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, nice one. Will be useful.--MacRusgail (talk) 23:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Righty, I've added the sound file, also for Gigha, Skye and Falkirk. Have a shufty and tell me what you think, it might be a good idea to add them (gradually) to all the place name pages with a Gaelic name on them. It's easier to find a good spot for it though on the pages with an infobox... any good ideas where to put it on pages which don't have one? Akerbeltz (talk) 23:24, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

• Copied material ends

I think this works well and is a real addition to the infobox. Not sure about other pages - it may depend on the context. I suppose it would be possible to come up with a new infobox for the purpose if there are lots of such instances. Ben MacDui 07:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

An Infobox Pronounciation would be cool, which sits on the right hand side and has foreign-language names as a list, displaying language name, the word in question and the IPA. There's loads of pages where that would be handy. Something like:

Scots Gaelic:

an tairbeart^ⓘ

IPA: [ən̪ˠ t̪ʰaɾʲapərˠʃt̪]

Irish:

IPA: [ən t̪ʰaɾʲəbʲəɾt̪]

While I am a fan of the IPA I do admit that it often does not sit that well inside a body of text. Problem is, I can make sound files no probs but I have no idea how you'd make an infobox. Akerbeltz (talk) 09:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

PS Can an infobox be made so it can sit inside a subheader and not at the top? I'm also thinking of the Skye article for example where there are Gaelic names and place names further down in the text body. Akerbeltz (talk) 09:40, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

The short answer is yes. Creating an infobox is easy enuf if it doesn't need internal complexity. I'll have a go soon-ish unless anyone else wants to pitch in. Ben MacDui 20:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Example

{{Scottish Placenames (SandV)
|celtic name= ''An Tairbeart''
|IPA1= ən̪ˠ t̪ʰaɾʲapərˠʃt̪
|audio1={{Audio|AnTairbeart.ogg}}
|norse name= Unknown
|IPA2= 
|audio2=
|other name= ''An Tairbeart'' (Irish)
|IPA3= ən t̪ʰaɾʲəbʲəɾt̪
|audio3=
|references=
}}

This uses the somewhat basic Template:Scottish Placenames (SandV). The easiest way to use it is just to cut and paste the above and fill in the appropriate text after the "=". It will automatically choose the name of the page it is on as the title (i.e. if you put it on the "Tarbert" page it will say that not "WikiProject Scottish Islands"). Ben MacDui 15:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, been away. I was thinking of something much more generic, perhaps something that could even be used for other languages - because this issue of IPA/pronunciation of non-English words and place-names is bound to be a problem else where too. So if we make it not specific to Scottish place names but simply and infobox where you can give the word in question (linked to a sound file if it exists), state the language and the IPA. Perhaps even something that's collapsible might be good, so it's there but does not clutter. Perhaps simply with a Pronunciation header, with the other info only visible when you expand. I checked the infobox project they don't seem to have anything for pronunciation at the moment except [this] which doesn't seem to be working. Akerbeltz (talk) 19:12, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

There is one other factor, namely that the language varies, much like English. So if a sound file is provided, in some cases, it may be necessary to point out which accent/dialect it represents.--MacRusgail (talk) 19:48, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Fortunately not. I'm giving standard Gaelic aka West Highland Gaelic without any particular dialectal features so for the most part notes on dialect will not be neccessary. Overall, the issue can be dealt with by making reference to certain varietes in the languages link, for example American English or British English. Akerbeltz (talk) 20:46, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

PS And before anyone asks, yes, there is such a thing as a consensus variety of Gaelic, it's just rarely taught cause most tutors know diddlysquat about teaching the sounds of Gaelic and yes, this is my work speciality so I know what I'm talking about ;) Akerbeltz (talk) 20:55, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

The consensus is fairly recent though, and the language is not fully standardised. Plus some of the spelling reforms add to the improvement/mess (delete as appropriate). It hasn't had time to bed down, but I think it is increasingly relevant...--MacRusgail (talk) 21:53, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

No but then neither is English. Seriously, people make way too much fuss about those minor discrepancies between spellings. Besides, the fewest of those are relevant to place-names as most squabbles about the spelling are about things like the irregular verbs. I would say they can be dealt with on a case by case basis as appropriate. For example if there's a strongly deviant local variant. I don't think we need to be holier than the pope for Gaelic, after all, English place names don't usually go all the way to deal with local pronounciations. Take Ilkley for example which has the rather divergent Ilkla pronunciation locally but that's not really dealt with on the page. So my view is that if and when such information is available and significant, we include it. Otherwise we broadly ignore it. This isn't a dialect survey after all ;) Akerbeltz (talk) 23:55, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

MacDui, since you seem to understand how they work - I've read through the infopages but what I still don't get is where the code actually goes. For example, on the Template:Infobox IPA page, I can see the finished article but it doesn't look like the coding that the infopages seem to suggest for creating an infobox. It's probably something very obvious I'm not getting here...

The other thing is, [this] infobox seems to already exist but is unfinished - might it be easier to finish this one rather than start a new one? Akerbeltz (talk) 11:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

If you go to User:Ben MacDui/Sandbox you will see the above in isolation. Feel free to muck about with it. e.g changing the entries to Tighnabruach. I am not all that well versed in the code of the infoboxes myself but you could either add suggestions for changes to Template talk:Scottish Placenames (SandV) or copy the entire code of Template:Scottish Placenames (SandV) into your own sandbox and see what you can come up with.

By all means try to reactivate attempts at the link above, although it would appear to be quiet - nothing of substance has been added since Jan 06. Ben MacDui 08:24, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I've tried playing around with the Islands infobox but it's just too large to do what we want it to do. The subtemplate of the Language infobox does seem to be active, if I understand this rightly, it's just something that appears within the Language infobox. But I may be wrong, I still don't get infoboxes.

Anyway, I've put a request up on the Help_talk:Infobox page, hopefully someone who knows how to do them can help, it's not a difficult one fortunately. Akerbeltz (talk) 12:28, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I've replied there as - other than the drop down idea ( I don't know what that is) - I am not sure what else you are after..... Ben MacDui 18:42, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Just something that's a lot smaller - imagine the current one sitting in the Skye article whenever Gaelic place names occur, it would be nothing but infobox but if we can do one that's drop-down (like the show bit on Pearl River Delta for example (under the pic)). Akerbeltz (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

This took me ages scurrying around media wiki, but its relatively easy when you know how. I think it needs some tweaking but is now "collapsed" as per the above example. Ben MacDui 17:12, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey nice one. So if we can change the title from Scottish Islands just to Pronunciation and loose the picture of the birlinn, we could use it! Akerbeltz (talk) 18:27, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

If you knew how much effort the birlinn had caused you would be more respectful sir! Nonetheless, I will remove it. As to the title - the title is actually "PAGENAME". Thus, if this page was called "Glasgow", that's what you'd see. I realise this doesn't work if you want to show the pronunciation of Steòrnabhagh in the Lewis article. I'll fix both, then paste an example into one of the innumerable Tarbert articles you are doubtless watching. Talking of which...... Ben MacDui 19:19, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Done - probably best to make any further comments at Template talk:Scottish Placenames (SandV). Ben MacDui 19:43, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Wee places

I notice that a lot of the wee places that have had articles created recently are being deleted. Surely it's best that the names become redirects, so that they don't come back to haunt us. In my experience, if an article like this gets deleted, it often gets recreated at some point, as it comes out of a gazetteer.

Also worth bearing in mind that a lot of settlements in the north and west of Scotland are very spread out.--MacRusgail (talk) 18:32, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

In general I agree. However, Altavaid had nothing to redirect to, and another of the prods I did change to a redirect, but this was reverted, so prodding it seemed the next best thing to do. Ben MacDui 19:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

For example are we agreed that Baramore isn't actually a village, given that Eilean Shona has a total population of nine, and that the former should be a redirect? Ben MacDui 20:39, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I've no idea how big Baramore is... I did tag it more or less automatically, but I tend to associate the name "Barrymore" with bad television than the Hebrides! I think that the pages should be kept, but as redirects. That said, some Highland settlements are spread out, and/or their historical significance outweighs their current population. --MacRusgail (talk) 21:13, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd say Camuscross was a redirect to Isleornsay. Ben MacDui 19:38, 8 January 2009 (UTC) Likewise, Dunan could be redirected to Luib, Highland (which could also be moved to Luib, Skye. Ben MacDui 10:44, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Walls/South Walls

I have had a couple of emails from Cantick (talk · contribs) - apparently locals are keen to see their island returned to its "rightful name" of "Walls" - "which was one of the reasons we agreed to correct your Wiki section in the first place". I will drop them another note asap, but in the meantime let's keep an eye on South Walls and Hoy. Ben MacDui 18:36, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Areas in infoboxes

At present the great majority are in hectares/acres or ha/mi2, although a few larger ones e.g. Skye use km2/mi2. User:Lightmouse and his friendly bot have recently started adding some conversion templates and changing the area to km2/mi2. I contacted him to ask why and the reply was:

"It seems to me that larger areas should be expressed in square kilometres. They are easier to understand for ordinary people and are seen on maps as grid squares."

Personally I doubt users familiar with the metric system will have much difficulty, but either way I think a consistent approach would help. I suggest a brief discussion here to avoid inconsistent changes to two or three hundred articles.

My suggestion is that we use ha for islands either less than 10,000 ha or less than 1000 ha only. I prefer the latter, if only on the grounds that it is less effort to complete all the conversions. Ben MacDui 08:54, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree we should have a consistent approach for islands. I certainly don't think we should use units that produce lots of areas less than 1 (either km2 or mi2). The point of SI units is that the number is between 1 and 999 - outside that range the units step up or down by 1000.

• I support ha up to 1000 with km2 above that.

Can we agree on imperial units as well?

• I suggest acres up to 2500, then sq miles.

Thus, the break points would be at the same physical area, 1,000 hectares (10 km²) and 2,500 acres (3.9 sq mi). Finavon (talk) 11:45, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I believe the '1 to 1000' guide is useful and there is 'wiggle room' down to 0.1 unit. The benefit of SI is that it sweeps away multiple units and leaves only one unit that gets repeated often. Thus the mode of thinking should be 'where can we use the SI unit?' rather than 'where can we use the hectare?'. I think it is quite reasonable to prefer square kilometres for large areas all the way down to 0.1 square kilometres and prefer square metres for small areas all the way up to 100,000 square metres. However, if people insist on hectares, I think we can tolerate them in the range between 10,000 square metres and 1 square kilometre i.e. 1 to 100 ha. If you are outside that range, you really should be using the SI unit. Lightmouse (talk) 10:53, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I am quite happy with Finavon's suggestion and I much prefer the consistency of 1 ha, 10 ha, 100 ha, 999 ha. It is not clear to me why we "really should be using the SI unit" when the published literature doesn't. Ben MacDui 15:31, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean by 'consistency'. If you told ordinary people that an area is 4 square kilometres, they will have a better idea of its size than if you told them it is 400 ha. If you asked somebody to estimate an area in square kilometres using a map, it is easy but estimating hectares is difficult. If you have two units, there will always be a transition from one to the other. There is no upper limit to large areas measured in square kilometres and I don't think the lower limit should be 10 square kilometres. Lightmouse (talk) 23:38, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

What we mean by consistency is that the vast majority of islands are smaller than 10km2 and it therefore provides a more consistent look if only the relatively small number of larger islands use this unit. I very much doubt that an ordinary person is going to find it easier to imagine 0.95km2 rather than 95 ha. In my experience people habitually use ha/acres for this kind of measurement as do, to repeat the above, the major published materials including Haswell-Smith, Murray, the census of islands etc. even for the larger islands. Ben MacDui 09:28, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I see what you mean by consistency now. Thanks. You mention several important issues:

• the ability of people to imagine kilometres versus hectares. You think 0.95 km² isn't easier than 95 ha. I think it is. An area that almost fills a 1 kilometre square is easy enough to imagine, I have no clue when you talk about hectares, it is just a number. We could test this easily enough by taking 100 people one-by-one to the top of a mountain overlooking the countryside. There would be various tasks in random order:
  • Point out 10 areas on an OS map of differing sizes and tell each person to estimate the area in hectares
  • Point out 10 areas on an OS map of differing sizes and tell each person to estimate the area in square kilometres
  • Point out 10 areas on the ground of differing sizes and tell each person to estimate the area in hectares
  • Point out 10 areas on the ground of differing sizes and tell each person to estimate the area in square kilometres
  • Give each person 10 different hectare values and ask them to point out a piece of land of that area
  • Give each person 10 different square kilometre values and ask them to point out a piece of land of that area

The scores would give us the answer.

• government statistics. Yes, it is true that government statistics and other publications use hectares. That is a valid point but it is influenced by special interests such as farming and estate agents. They are further influenced by their legacy of using acres and by legal requirements to use certain units on official forms. Wikipedia is not a farmers in-house publication. In fact, I think the general public that use maps are more likely to benefit from having units that can be seen directly onto map grid squares. You can pull up a web page that does this right now.
• consistency. This is really about having a guideline to a cut-off and I agree this is a valid point. You imply that there is a natural cut-off point at 10 km². There may be a coincidence with Scottish Islands and that may be convenient but where would you stop when it comes to other land areas? The cut-off is arbitrary and we should default to the easier unit km all the way down to 1 km² and possibly down to 0.1 km².

My recommendation is that the Wikipedia policy is based on "Make full use of km² before using hectares" rather than thinking "How can I maximise the use of hectares?". I could accept a guideline of "km² above 10 km², both units are optional below" if that didn't morph into a Wikipedia-wide guideline of "don't use km² below 10 km²". Lightmouse (talk) 11:55, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

First of all, most people I know would have no difficulty at all in understanding what the difference between a 10 acre field, a 100 acre field and an island several square miles or kms in extent was. Presumably if the authors concerned felt there was likely to be significant confusion they would change their ways. Secondly, you may be pleased to hear, I have (in this context) no interest in "Wikipedia-wide guidelines". The world isn't box-shaped, so let's not try to put it on one. Thirdly, if I may, I think you are suggesting motives for government statistics without any real evidence. For comparison, I have a brochure produced by the Department of Community etc. Affairs for Eire about Irish islands but it is not very definitive. Most islands described are sizeable and usually as being e.g. "4km by 2.8 km" although Ghabhla is recorded as "328 hectares".

I think what we need is a simple agreement for use on Scottish islands, with no implications for any other aspect of Geography (save perhaps Irish islands). Within the text there may be all sorts of reasons for "both units being optional" in any given situation, but if we can agree on a default position of "km² above 10 km²" hopefully that will prevent an unnecessary fuss. Ben MacDui 20:33, 3 January 2009 (UTC)