Talk:Gigha

Gigha has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 30, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed

Scottish Islands High‑importance

	Scottish islands portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scottish Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands in Scotland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Scottish IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject Scottish IslandsTemplate:WikiProject Scottish IslandsScottish Islands articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article was a past project collaboration.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Gi-haris

I have never heard of a pronunciation gi-haris. Can anyone confirm this to be accurate? Ben MacDui 08:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I now note that this information was provided by User:195.93.32.13 who was later blocked for contributing childish vandalism. I will remove the reference. Ben MacDui 09:00, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gigha, seat of power for Conall mac Comgall, 6th century.

I have added a paragraph outlining the case for Gigha being the site of the Battle of Deglon in 574 and the possible seat of the Dalriadan king, Conall mac Comgall.

Any comments are welcome. Karl Craig 02:24, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its a useful addition. I have made the reference tag consistent with the rest of the page. Can you say which Society it is the proceedings of? I couldn't see anything obvious. The article has expanded now to the point where some re-organising and sections might be useful which I may have a go at later. Ben MacDui (Talk) 10:26, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Orr Anderson's Early Sources of Scottish History (I, 78) doesn't give a gloss for Delgu/Deloch/Teloch. Marjorie Ogilvie Anderson's Kings and Kingship in Early Scotland (149() says the battle was in Kintyre and presumes that the aggressor was probably Báetán mac Cairill. Bannerman's Studies in the History of Dalriada (80) also places the battle in Kintyre. The Annals agree on Kintyre as well: "Cath Delgon a Cínd Tire"; "Bellum Telocho i Ciunn Tire". Watson's The Place-Names of Celtic Scotland (497) says delgu is "thorny place". If Skene thought Delgu was on Gigha, that's worth mentioning, but, like a lot of his geographical guess-work, it doesn't seem to have left much impression. The Onomasticon Godelicum at CELT/Documents of Ireland (http://www.ucc.ie:8080/cocoon/doi/locus/D which rarely works but is cached by Google) gives "Delgon: Cath D. in Cenn-tíre, Cps. 67; ¶ cath Delgan in Kantire, Of. 473; ¶ cath Delgenn .i. Telocho i Ciunntíre, Adr. 371." That's helpful! Cheers, Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:47, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quick Review

Not from scratch as BM has already improved it greatly.

Sections

Geology - Yes, small mention

Geography/Geomorphology - Yes, but no mention of Islay and Jura. Climate should be in separate section. From previous experience, would suggest that trees mentioned are not palms, but cabbage trees.

History/Archaeology - Yes, but poor, except Conall mac Comgall paragraph. Should community buy out be under history or not?

Ecclesiastical connections: No (barely - St Catan's chapel), should be mentioned.

Shipwrecks: - Yes, excellent, needs more refs.

Economy - Yes, but under "Horticulture and attractions", "Community buy-out" and "wind turbines", but should probably be standardised.

Wildlife - No, poor.

Transport links - Yes, so-so, could be ref'd.

Attractions - Mixed up with horticulture. Needs standard layout.

Population - Current, yes. Historic, no.

Prominent residents or natives. - Some

Media/Arts. - No. --MacRusgail (talk) 17:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty comprehensive improvement - needs a bit more on the modern era and economy to finish it off. Could you fill in the blanks on the "Roberts (1999)" in the refs section? Ben Mac Dui 07:53, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Roberts is a mystery, not sure where it came from!!! --MacRusgail (talk) 20:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Palm trees

About the Ardminish image, that is not a palm tree. You can see these things masquerading as such in many resorts in the British Isles, including freezing ones! The tree in question is more closely related to the lily family than palms. It's called the New Zealand Cabbage Tree. They're often misidentified as palms - in the IOM they call them "Manx Palms". They're nothing of the sort - just a marketer's dream!--MacRusgail (talk) 13:31, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"It is also widely planted as an ornamental tree, in New Zealand and also in western Europe (including the British Isles) and the Northwest coast of the United States[1]. Because it tolerates cold weather better than many other tree-sized monocots, this plant is often planted by people wishing to give a tropical, exotic look to their yards or gardens. The overall visual effect is said by many to create a view reminiscent of a palm tree (it is occasionally even mis-named "Cornish palm", "Torbay palm" or "Manx palm" in the British Isles due to its extensive use within Torbay and as the official symbol of that area under its alternative identity, the English Riviera). " Quoth MacRusgail and copied here by Ben Mac Dui 15:06, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rothesay

Thanks, BM, probably should have done that myself. Trust me, I've encountered these things from Alderney to Plockton, from Bournemouth to the Isle of Man.

I've also seen them in their native environment - New Zealand, growing right up on mountain sides!!! They like 'em in Rothesay tae.--MacRusgail (talk) 15:51, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough - for some reason I missed the creation of the above "Quick Review" section. I might not have been so dozy if I'd spotted it. Ben Mac Dui

Etymology

The Norse is not unknown. Czerkawaska (2006) pp 35-36 has "It has long been accepted that the name of the island, Gigha, or as it appears on some of the old maps, Gega, is derived from the Norse invaders of the island, who called the place Gudey, meaning either God's island or the Island of the Good Harbour." A Norse name is attested by H-Smith, Murray, Keay and Mac an Tailleir as well.

I have to agree with Akerbeltz [1] that the Sheila na Gig idea is little more than speculation. Czerkawaska herself calls the possibility "a remote and contentious one!" as now included in the footnote, although I agree this was not clear in the original text. Ben Mac Dui 10:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not only that, the derivation, even the existance of "Sheela na Gig" is highly tentative itself. And it just wouldn't make phonological sense at all. The G- would be dependent on an Irish case marking that turns Cìoch into gCìoch. And why should either Gaels or Norse have a problem with the /x/ sound and turn it into /g/? It sounds like the archetypal "Gee I don't know what this word means let's find the things that look similar in the Gaelic dictionary" approach. Akerbeltz (talk) 13:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. It's hard to imagine locals being overjoyed at some of the possible meanings of "gig" either. Ben Mac Dui 17:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I"m afraid the unfortunate tendency Akerbeltz described for Gaelic also happens for Norse (which is sadly the basis of most place-name analysis). I'm curious how Gudey gets into an early 14th century Latin document Gug? What rapid succession of imaginary sound changes or orthographic practices are postulated here? But let's get this right, there is no actual Norse name for the island, right? I'm unclear on this, as while the infobox implies there is the text implies there isn't. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 01:11, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And many other unfortunate languages ;) Mac an Tàilleir does state the origin is Norse for God's isle (also the derivation of Gighay (Gaelic Gioghaigh). He doesn't state the actual Norse name for either but since he's one of the bigmen at the School of Scottish Studies' place name department, he's normally regarded as a bona fide source. Gud- to Gug- isn't impossible I guess, some of those medieval scribes had ghastly handwriting and it may just have been a copying error. The Old Irish glosses get worse each time copied by a non-Gael for example. Akerbeltz (talk) 01:33, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Odd, I just checked Gighay and there they say Gydha's isle... not citing a source though so I'm tending towards Mac an Tàilleir. I'm not sure, by the way, that saying that Norse is the basis of most place names analysis is entirely fair - a lot, certainly but even Caithness is peppered with Gaelic place names. It does seem to feature in a lot of the islands' names, true enough. Akerbeltz (talk) 01:37, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What I meant with basis of most place-name analysis was that often the technique is no more sophisticated than looking for a Norse word that looks vaguely similar, and apply the tricks used by Kenneth Jackson and other such fellows to convince colleagues their suggestions are "certain". I'd love to see what etymologists would have come up with in their searches through Old Norse lexicons if the relationship between Old "Irish"/"Gaelic" Ì and Iona wasn't so transparent because of the uniquely high availability of sources. Doesn't the Delgu, discussed above, also make you suspicious? I've not really looked into it but there is immediately the suspicion the Gug of that 14th century name is related to the second element there. Anyway, the Latin spelling in that period incidentally is heavily influenced by Old French. If you know anything about that you can perhaps say whether a g written after a u represents /g/, or something else. But to get back to the point and clear this up ... there is no attestation of the Norse word, right? Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 02:35, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOL a lot of things said on Wikipedia pages about etymology make me suspicious. It's perhaps the one consistently dark spot that I've come across because every foolish etymology ever proposed in a leaflet or book sooner or later finds its way onto here. It's ... upsetting at times. And even in Old French a g around u would still be /g/. I personally have no attestation of the Norse place name but my material on Norse is thin. I remember a similar discussion when we were doing Skye and we left a note on a Norse specialists page who then actually came up with an occurrence of skið in a sage. Perhaps we should do the same? Akerbeltz (talk) 11:31, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps "attested" is being used in a highly specific way here that I am not familiar with. Keay, Czerkawaska, H-Smith. Murray (77) and Mac an Tàilleir all refer to the Norse origin of the name. None specify the source of their information. Murray (1966) The Hebrides adds something new. "Gigha comes from the Norse Gjedöe, meaning Goat Island. (!) Perhaps the source is the Orkneyinga Saga, which the GA reviewer felt did not pass muster. I must get a copy of this. Thus while I cannot pinpoint a primary source, the secondary sources seem convinced there is a Norse origin. Ben Mac Dui 20:07, 5 February 2009 (UTC) PS The Orkneyinga Saga is in Czerkawaska's bibliography.[reply]

What the GA reviewer said was this:

I have a different copy of the Orkneyinga Saga, I have the Pálsson and Edwards (1981) Penguin classic version which is based on the 1978 Hogarth Press edition. Sorry, but quoting a book without a page number (or in this case a chapter number / Genealogy / Glossary) does not provide an adequate WP:Verify of anything, especially if its not linked to anything in particular (apart from the Info box). From a process of elimination I could work out that in was not intended to verify the OS coordinates and/or the 2001 population and/or the Local Authority; but I am still unsure what it is being quoted. The names Gigha, Guðey and Gjáey do not appear in the Pálsson and Edwards version. Re-looking at your reply and the link to Wikipedia:WikiProject Scottish Islands/Orkneyinga Saga, it appears to be an unstated use of the maps in the Joseph Anderson's edition that is being referenced (if it is, then specifically say so). The Pálsson and Edwards edition has only three maps: Orkney and Caithness, The Faroes - West Norway - British Isles, and Shetland; and the "GB" map is too small to name Gigha. Do you really think that this "uncertainty" is compliant with WP:Verify?

Pyrotec (talk) 20:26, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear, I am not suggesting that your concerns about this source were in any way unjustified, especially given the new GA criteria - the Orkneyinga page was created before the requirement for page nos etc. It is very clear that that requirement must now be met, and in any case it is obviously not acceptable to have a misleading reference. As soon as I get hold of a hard copy I'll make sure the offending WP:ISLE page is attended to. It is not this source that is being referenced for the Norse names now. I note the island's own website says " the Norse King Hakon, who also gave the isle its name, Gudey," which might be a clue to the original source. Ben Mac Dui 22:08, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response Akerbeltz. @ Ben, what I mean by attested is whether or not there is a Norse source that contains the name in Norse. Otherwise, the Norse name isn't known. With the Norse names sometimes the Gaelic and earlier forms make it obvious what the Norse name is. From the text here it appears that this is not the case. It is my wikiphilosophy that editors should allow readers as much scope to make their own judgment as possible. This is why I think it is bad to have theories presented as facts in infoboxes. And in general it is far more useful to tell the reader whether a Norse name is known or not that cherry-picking one or two theories and presenting it as fact (which is how doing this can appear). Infoboxes are particularly sensitive here as the scope for nuance is limited. All the best, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 23:45, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, but that does not absolve us from being able to provide reliable sources. Several for a Norse derivation are provided above. I will try to find someone with a copy of the Orkneyinga Saga asap. So far we don't have any sources at all that think the name is either unknown or not of Norse origin. This isn't cherry-picking, it's simply quoting the sources. Ben Mac Dui 08:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tindall, Jemima (1981), Scottish Island Hoping: A handbook for the Independent Traveller, Londom: MacDonald Futura Publishers, ISBN 0-354-04700-0, p. 237, says: "...Gigha was christened 'Gudey' (the Good Isle) by King Haakon of Norway in the 11th Century.".Pyrotec (talk) 17:18, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Orkneyinga Saga is a history of the Earls of Orkney, and Gigha is not in Orkney. The Penguin version is 110 chapters (215 pages) plus a Genealogy of the Earls of Orkney, a Glossary of Personal Names, a Glossary of Place Names and three maps. The Hebrides is named as Sudreyjar (with a curly d), but there is no chapter on the Hebrides. To be somewhat unkind, it seems that the Orkneyinga Saga is just on a crib sheet for adding "fake" and not so fake references for padding out articles.Pyrotec (talk) 19:47, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whilst I would prefer to assume that the intentions of the author are good, and that in this case at least the reference to " Guðey" seems verifiable I agree this page needs further documentation. Many of the names there are repeated by other authors too. Ben Mac Dui 09:13, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I know it's a reference but I think we need to be *very* careful here. A lot of tourist guides are utterly hopeless when it comes to etymology. They just like a good story. I think the only way to resolve this is to find an actual mention of it in some Norse text. Let's face it - it may be solid research tha Jemima did, or she may have just looked it up on Wikipedia... Akerbeltz (talk) 17:51, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ben, to me as a historian, it's pretty important that this is found in historical Norse to be listed authoritatively as the Norse name, whether or not more naive modern published sources mistake it as such. Speculation in other sources is a different matter. If you find it in historical Norse, then really the whole etymology section would be pointless as there'd be no room for debate (unless the Norse name had no transparent meaning and was clearly a Celtic name). Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, Ben, I didn't notice that you had reverted again; that the Norse is not known is implied in the text inside the etymology section, certainly not "OR" [on my part it is implied] as I've not researched this beyond reading the wiki text and comments here. That just doesn't make any sense as a reading of WP:NOR. I've added the appropriate tag to let readers know of the concern while we discuss the matter here. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 19:19, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are right of course, I was writing in haste - I think it's more an issue of "truth and verifiability". I any more than happy to have dodgy modern authors questioned .... and we only have their word for lots of things. The Ogham script on the standing stone could have been carved by a fourteenth century vandal as I doubt there is a primary source for its assumed beginnings. The Orkenyinga saga is one reference - which might include a typo and/or there might have been an alternative and much more commonly used name at the time. In this sense, a very great deal about antiquity may be "unknown". Ben Mac Dui 09:42, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a bit of random browsing - my Norwegian is shaky but I think someone who has the Håkon Håkonssons saga should check this ref out [2]. Akerbeltz (talk) 20:43, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gudøy is mentioned. As I've just done a Norwegian GAN (and passed it) I know who to ask.Pyrotec (talk) 20:55, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gudøy, that translated into God Island, is mentioned in the text, Hákonar saga Hákonarsonar (no-one can say we do not have an article for everything on wikipedia). The foot-note explicitly states that Gudøy is "Gigha, in the Hebrids, west of Kintyre." Unfortunetly, the text is a modern translation of the saga, and therefore the translator may have chosen to change the name. Here is the original text in Old Norse, that would contain the Norse name for Gigha. I also found an English translation, that uses the term Gudey for Gigha. The footnote states that this is a contraction of Dhia (Gaelic for God) and ey (Norse for island). It is too late at night to skim-read Norse to find the exact wording, but I would believe that Johnston's translation has kept the original. Ey has become øy, but I think perhaps Gud has not changed in 750 years. Arsenikk ^(talk) 23:02, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I trust the source but not the footnote. Deriving Gigha/Gudey from Dia (not Dhia, that's a vocative) and a vowel intial element to end up with a consonant in the middle would require some fancy logic. I'll have a go at finding the right line. Akerbeltz (talk) 23:28, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't these people know how to be concise LOL found it. It's on page 573 (of the original page numbering) of the Norse link above, and the name given is Guðey. Can someone else check though - it looks like a nominative to me but my Norse is ... patchy. Akerbeltz (talk) 00:13, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is why I asked Arsenikk to look at your reference - which he has done.Pyrotec (talk) 08:22, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's an island "off Kintyre" (Satir) called Guðey at § 328, line 8 (trans. "Then King Hakon sailed south long Kintyre and lay at the place that is called Gigha") and § 329, line 7 (trans "Then they went out under Gigha, to King Hakon"). That's clearly Gigha (supported by name and geography), and our Norse name is not in doubt, independent of the etymology or how it is spelled in modern Gaelic. This can be separated from the etymology now. :) So is there any objection to listing Guðey as the Old Norse name in the infobox with reference clearly indicating the source and modern interpretation? I don't think this is too much for a GA. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 12:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. Akerbeltz (talk) 17:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

None whatever. Your diligence is admirable. Ben Mac Dui 21:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll add it myself later (takes a bit to format). Thanks! :) Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:58, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

I've put the collapsible infobox in there with the Etymology section that gives the pronunciation of all the Gaelic words that don't have their own pages. Putting the IPA into the text for each Gaelic name, phrase or place name would just look totally ugly. I'll try and make sound files too. They're currently in alphabetical order - anyone have any thoughts on that? Akerbeltz (talk) 15:44, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gigha. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070313003106/http://www.appins.org/martin.htm to http://www.appins.org/martin.htm

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) 20:35, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Gigha. 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) 10:24, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gigha. 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) 16:14, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 31 August 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. (non-admin closure) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:54, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gigha → Isle of Gigha – Per WP:WIAN this is the English name ("Giogha" is the Scottish Gaelic name) per the Ordnance Survey. Thus being consistent with the OS in other cases. As to other sources that use "Isle of Gigha" are its website, Google Maps, Southern Hebrides and Walkhighlands. Although the name is tautological there are many other places that are also tautological, see List of tautological place names#Islands and per WP:USENGLISH this is acceptable (note that neighboring Cara Island is tautological). Since there don't appear to be other uses of "Gigha", "Gigha" can continue to redirect to the island like Skye does. This move was reverted in 2006 because "all the other Hebrides articles exclude the 'Isle of ' part. also this broke the box at the bottom." but that's not the case (for example Isle of Skye) and like that it will be piped and defaultsorted. It was formerly "Gigha Island" as can be seen on old OS maps but per WP:MODERNPLACENAME and WP:NAMECHANGES it is now "Isle of Gigha". Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:10, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Seat of Power for Conall mac Comgall

Hello,

I looked into the source saying that Gigha was a Seat of Power for Conall mac Comgall, and it doesn't seem to be saying that at all. It identifies the battlefield with Eilean da Ghallagan, which is a known island in West Tarbert Bay. Perhaps I have missed something, but I think this section should probably be removed or editted. If there is a case for believing Gigha was a Dal Riatan seat of power, it needs a better source.

(This is my first time editting on wikipedia, so apologies if I have not placed this in the right location). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjhrandall16 (talk • contribs) 22:27, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this input - I will check it out in due course. Meantime I will have to recover from the dreadful page move which I missed above. Ben Mac Dui 15:33, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 10 August 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. —usernamekiran (talk) 23:16, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Isle of Gigha → Gigha – There are various main sources for articles about Scottish islands. The primary one is Haswell-Smith, Hamish (2004). The Scottish Islands. Edinburgh: Canongate. ISBN 978-1-84195-454-7. who has a chapter sub-section No 2.3 starting on page 37 called "Gigha". Ben Mac Dui 15:10, 10 August 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. — Amakuru (talk) 12:20, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following books listed as regular sources at WP:GOODISLE refer to "Gigha":

Murray, W.H. (1973) The Islands of Western Scotland: the Inner and Outer Hebrides. London. Eyre Methuen. ISBN 0413303802 pp. 34,73,76 etc.
Murray, W.H. (1977) The Companion Guide to the West Highlands of Scotland. London. Collins. p.115 etc.
Murray, W.H. (1966) The Hebrides. London. Heinemann. pp 2,5,13 etc.
Watson, W. J. (1994) The Celtic Place-Names of Scotland. Edinburgh; Birlinn. ISBN 1841583235. p. 222

This title from that page equivocates a little

Keay, J. & Keay, J. (1994) Collins Encyclopaedia of Scotland. London. HarperCollins. ISBN 0002550822 p.423 which lists" "GIGHA, Island of, Argyll".

There are no books that I have on that page that so refer to "Isle of Gigha". In addition, the following refer to "Gigha".

Pallister, Marian "Lost Argyll" (2005) Edinburgh: Birlinn, p 181 etc.
Omand, Donald (ed.), The Argyll Book, Edinburgh: Birlinn, ISBN 1-84158-480-0 pp. 7, 178, 209, 245, 153, 175 (various authors of chapters).
Iain Mac an Tailleir. "Placenames" (2011). Pàrlamaid na h-Alba.
The most comprehensive listing of geographical data is Rick Livingstone’s "Tables of the Islands of Scotland".
National Records of Scotland (15 August 2013). "Appendix 2: Population and households on Scotland's Inhabited Islands" (PDF). Statistical Bulletin: 2011 Census: First Results on Population and Household Estimates for Scotland Release 1C (Part Two) (PDF) (Report). SG/2013/126. Retrieved 14 August 2020.

A. O. Anderson, "Early Sources", vol. ii, pp. 617
Marion Campbell's "Argyll: The Enduring Heartland" has a map with "Gigha I." but the text always refers to "Gigha" alone.
The most comprehensive book about the island is Czerkawaska, Catherine (2006) God's Islanders: A History of the People of Gigha. Edinburgh. Birlinn. ISBN 1-84158-297-2. It has a map called "Isle of Gigha" and one or two references to the same in the text but most of them are to "Gigha".

In other words, most of the sources listed as refs in the article use "Gigha". It is quite true that the Ordnance Survey have chosen to use "Isle of Gigha" I don't have any idea why they have done that (or for Skye). It is also true that the local development trust is called "Isle of Gigha Heritage Trust" but you will also notice that after introducing themselves the next section on their home page is "About Gigha" and that both "Gigha" and "Isle of Gigha" are liberaly sprinkled about.

The only reference on JSTOR I could find is "An Account of the Fungi of Arran, Gigha and Kintyre". P. M. Kirk, B. M. Spooner. Kew Bulletin, Vol. 38, No. 4 (1984), pp. 503-597

So if you do few web searches "Isle of Gigha" looks good. If you examine the literature in print about the topic this is at best an occassional use. Even web searches to more reliable sources that are less interested in marketing such as the Gazetteer have "Gigha". In other words "Isle of Gigha" is nowhere near being the WP:WIAN and (unlike e.g. Mull) there is no need to disambiguate. Respectfully, Ben Mac Dui 15:10, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. It seems that outsiders (including OS) commonly refer to Scottish Islands as 'Isle of ..' while locals just use the name. It is not surprising that other sources use the OS version, contrary to local use. I'm not sure how WP:WIAN is then applied. It states that raw counts from Google should be considered with extreme caution. It gives authority to Merriam-Webster's Geographical Dictionary which uses "Gigha" and only lists "Isle of .." Man, Portland, Man and Wight, even then having the main entry as "Man, Isle of". Finavon (talk) 07:41, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per the sources I provided in the previous discussion, the OS and official website among other sources do use this version. The lack of "Isle of" on some maps though is probably due to the fact until recently it was called "Gigha Island". The sources that use "Gigha, Isle of" is simply because (especially with etymology or when discussing islands) the "Isle of" is redundant similar to the "River" part being redundant for River Thames. Although this source seems to be talking about airfields it does use "Islay" alone but "Isle of Gigha" for example. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:59, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but it's "Gigha airfield" here and "Gigha has its own grass airstrip" here. If we need a few more sources that use "Gigha" here are some from articles about places nearby: Gillies, H. Cameron (1906), The Place-Names of Argyll; Skene, William Forbes (1872), John of Fordun's Chronicle of the Scottish Nation; David Stephenson and Jon Merritt (2010) Argyll and the Islands: A Landscape Fashioned by Geology; Youngson, Peter (2001) Jura: Island of Deer. Can you say where it was recently called "Gigha Island"? I have a few articles by 19th century antiquarians and I don't see that use there. Ben Mac Dui 11:31, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

20th century OS maps for example use "Gigha Island". Philip's Navigator Britain (2016) uses "Gigha Island". I think what's happened is that the OS has changed name but it sometimes takes a while for it to propagate through. Similarly "Island of Bute" and "Island of Mull" were used previously, see the same map and User:Crouch, Swale/Island names/Table. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:38, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is one map, but there are numerous examples from a similar period that do not use this term. As far as I know the OS don't have any role in 'propogating'. This usage of "Isle of..." is generally of three forms:

In instances where it is used to disambiguate e.g. "Island of Mull" cf other Mulls such as "Mull of Kintyre".

For marketing purposes - especially if the island is not well know, making this clear is sometimes believed to have an econcomic value even if there is no need to disambiguate "visit our holiday cottages on the beautiful Isle of Skye".

Haswell-Smith lists the dozen or so examples where the traditional usage is generally "Isle of xxx" including of course the often amusing Isle of Ewe. Such examples do not include Gigha, Skye, Mull or Bute. (There are also a few of the form "xxx Isle" such as Lady Isle.) Ben Mac Dui 17:36, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have the 2015 of the Scottish Islands book, in the index there is Isle of Ewe and Isle of May within the 100 acre rule and there is also Isle of Gunnister, Isle of Nibon, Isle of Niddister, Isle of Stenness, Isle of West Burrafirth and Isle of Westerhouse which are small Shetland islands. On pages Xiii and Xiv it says that the Gaelic names are usually but not always closely related to common-usage name given by the Ordnance Survey. And also notes that this is usually used for simplicity but occasional corrections such as Rum instead of Rhum have been made. Note that Rhum is now Rùm (with the diacritic) so this is outdated. No explanation is given as to why "Isle of" was removed is given for Gigha. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:00, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, these "Isle of ..." examples are amongst the dozen I mention above. Rhum was a 19th century land-owner invention per the article - we use Rùm here for not entirely dissimilar reasons i.e to avoid confusion with the alcoholic beverage and "Rum" is failry common English language use. No explanation is given by H-Smith as to why he uses "Gigha" (or "Skye") because there is no need for one. "Isle of Gigha" is an occasional alternative to the usual name, which unlike e.g. "May" or "Ewe" is not in any way ambiguous. Ben Mac Dui 09:04, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looking through the list of islands with "Isle of X" on the OS;

6, Isle of Fethaland (not actually an island), Isle of Gunnister, Isle of Nibon, North/South Isle of Gletness, Isle of Stenness and Isle of West Burrafirth have places on the mainland with the same name minus "Isle of" such as there is a hamlet on the mainland called "Nibon" so "Isle of" is used to distinguish and HHS calls uses "Isle of" anyway.
2, Isle of Ewe and Isle of May are also so called by HHS and Ewe is a DAB page and May is about the month.
2, Isle of Niddister and Isle of Westerhouse do not appear to have a place named nearby on the mainland (but maybe there was in the past?) and Niddister and Westerhouse are red links but HHS also calls them "Isle of" anyway.
5, Isle of Arran, Isle of Bute, Isle of Lewis (not actually an island), Isle of Mull, Isle of Noss are named without the "Isle of" prefix by HHS but Arran, Bute, Lewis, Mull and Noss are DAB pages so as you say it could be argued its partly for disambiguation purposes.
2, Isle of Gigha (this one) and Isle of Skye are named without the "Isle of" prefix by HHS but Gigha is unambiguous and redirects to the island and although Skye (disambiguation) exists, Skye is a redirect to the island.
1, Isle of Raasay is at Raasay even though its got "Isle of" on the OS though the smaller scale maps omit the prefix (which is why I haven't yet proposed to move it). Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:11, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 13:21, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per nom and the real world. The previous move in the opposite direction in August/September 2019 (see above) should not have been made, especially when this had been previously deemed a "good article". There was no support for the move and the proposal made at that time was deeply flawed. Ordnance Survey is never a reliable source for place names, nor is Google Maps. The Heritage Trust website, which the proposer claimed as the island's website, may use "Isle of" in its header, but predominantly uses plain "Gigha" in its text, as do the Southern Hebrides and Walkhighlands websites that were cited. --92.41.69.251 (talk) 22:31, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The previous request has not been opposed though in nearly 10 days which is more than enough time even for a good article. As noted this move had been reverted years ago and such moves have been known to be controversial (eg Mull and Skye) but per Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions#Determining consensus no minimum participation is required. The Ordnance Survey is generally a reliable even if its less so in Scotland as noted it is what HHS uses that the OP notes is the primary source for Scottish islands. The heritage website seems to be more or less functioning as the island's website does use "Isle of Gigha" in the title and "Gigha" afterwards (as we do) but that's how things are normally done for example we usually use just "Thames" for River Thames in text after introducing it as "River Thames", same with Newcastle upon Tyne as just "Newcastle" etc. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:37, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Murder Island

Should we include a reference to the island being the location for this TV series?AndyCPrivate (talk) 21:30, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]