Talk:Dolgarrog

Pictures

If anyone has any pictures that do not fall under the copyright law, feel free to add some. Unfortunatly i dont live there anymore so cannot get pics up. Thanks --Shuyin05 20:28, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Garden Art section should be removed it is blatent promotion of the business,

Why? If it really is the worlds largest garden maze, is that not something really important to add to the article?--Shuyin05 23:12, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eigiau picture

Is the caption to the breached dam picture correct? I am fairly sure that the Lyn Eigau dam was rebuilt following the breach. Unfortunately I don't have the best reference book (Industrial locomotives of North Wales) to hand. I think the reservoir became redundant when a tunnel was constructed to Lyn CowlydCrantock 21:20, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's how it looks now, and caption is correct. It was never rebuilt (see also article on Llyn Eigiau). It still operates as a reservoir, with water going to Llyn Cowlyd as you say, but the water lever is much lower, in its natural basin, well below the level of the old dam in the picture. Hogyn Lleol 07:06, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid the caption IS wrong. The remenants of the dam still exist. The gap illustrated IS NOT the breach which caused the 1925 flooding, which is smaller and infact directly faces the rocky cliff seen in the photo. The real gap has a large channel to its fore, where the escaping water bore through the soil. Eam91 November 10 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eam91 (talk • contribs) 13:28, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could well be right, and what you say makes sense. At least one source says that a second breach was made to prevent the dam filling up again, and yet some photos of the dam, apparently taken at the time (http://www.oldphotos.co.uk/dolgarrog.htm) show THIS breach. Most sources seem to -assume- that this is the breach. It would be useful to solve this one - do you have any references? Hogyn Lleol ([[User talk:Hogyn

Lleol|talk]]) 13:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

p.s. Have a look at this picture - (http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/61038). Is this the same breach? It seems to show a scoured channel. Hogyn Lleol (talk) 13:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is the correct aperture. It is characteristically smaller, has ragged sides and has the appropriate trench extending away from its fore. If anybody has the know-how (because I don't), then it would certainly improve the article by removing the erroneous photo and replacing it with this good picture. EAM 91, 15 November 6.46pm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.79.216.64 (talk) 18:46, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dolgarrog. 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, 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) 03:03, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1925 photo

Does anyone know the source of File:Street scene after the disaster.jpg? The uploader claimed it was a 2016 photo by themselves, which seems false. I did not find acual source info in reverse image search. -- Infrogmation (talk) 01:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]