Jump to content

Talk:Helvellyn

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Questions

[edit]

What are the glaciated features? Is there Galciated erosional features, such as crag and Till?

What do you mean by that?. There are glaciated features all around. Red Tarn is a classic cwm, corrie or cirque.

I wondered if anyone has any information on how Helvellyn was named, when and by whom?. Timst 18.39 UTC, 4 November 2006

Timst. According to Brewer’s “Britain and Ireland” (2005) the name is Old Celtic in origin. It is an amalgamation of hal=upland and melyn=yellow. Liberally translated it means “yellow moor”. I am unsure why that name might have been adopted. But, bear in mind that places may have looked different in Old Celtic times to what they look now. regards. Bob BScar23625 19:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Yellow' is a very common element in Celtic place names; there are lots of Scottish mountains containing the name 'Buidhe', which is the Scottish Gaelic equivalent. I've always assumed it derives from the pale yellowy-green grass that grows in many upland areas, and is certainly present in the Eastern Fells today. One thing that's apparent about Celtic toponymy is that Celtic and Anglo-Saxon colour perceptions don't always match. --Blisco 19:36, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely. Different cultures see colours very differently. "Glas" in Welsh now means blue (usually), but in older texts, including toponyms, it can mean blue, green or grey, which seems unthinkable to an English speaker. A second point is that a mountain doesn't need to have much of a colour difference to be named after a colour. No-one expects a "Carn Dearg" to be brilliant scarlet, but rather just a bit reddish. This should always be kept in mind. Helvellyn should be interpreted as "the yellowish moor or "the yellower moor" [than the others around it], and not as the bright yellow moor. --Stemonitis 13:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chaps. I suggest a more mundane explanation. An area of upland which is not subject to sheep grazing quickly becomes covered by gorse. Gorse has bright yellow flowers, and an area densely populated by gorse looks yellow. Perhaps that is the explanation of the name?. Perhaps there were no sheep grazed on the steep slopes around Helvellyn in Celtic times and so Helvellyn was covered with bright yellow gorse?. Bob BScar23625 15:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An attractive theory (though rather less mundane than mine, I would have thought?!), but I suspect that any hill noted for being covered in gorse would be called "moor of the gorse" rather than "yellow moor". Anyway, fascinating though all this speculation is, it's not really contributing to the quality of the article – unless anyone can find a reference in a scholarly publication on the incidence and meaning of colours in Celtic place names with specific reference to Helvellyn, that is. --Blisco 17:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is Helvellyn's 'Parent Peak' really Scafell Pike? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.173.117 (talk) 23:32, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It seems odd that there is no mention of the ‘Avro 585 Gosport’ on the Wikipedia page named ‘Avro’. Neither ‘585’ nor ‘Gosport’ appears on this page. Anybody know anything about this?

Further to the above, the plot thickens. The Wikipedia page named ‘John F. Leeming’ (one of the two men who landed on Helvellyn) refers to the aeroplane as an ‘Avro Avian 585’. The Avro page lists the Avro 594 Avian and the Avro 616 Avian, but no Avro Avian 585 (or Avro 585 Avian). Can anyone sort this out? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.198.67.72 (talk) 21:04, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder why the metres-to-feet converter isn’t working properly. 950 metres = 3,117 feet (to the nearest whole number; to be exact, it’s a fraction less), not 3,120 feet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.198.85.215 (talk) 17:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Blisco. Fair enough. On another matter, your attention to the picture gallery has resulted in several images with people in them being removed. While you have retained 4 landscape-only pictures which are all virtually the same. Do you have some problem with pictures having people in them?. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 17:33, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I posted photographs that I presumed would have been of interest to anyone wanting to view the Helvellyn page. They seem to have been removed for no reason at all. Fair enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timst (talk • contribs) 18:54, 19 November 2006

Timst. I may be the guilty party on that. 4 very similar images were added in early November. Perhaps it might have been better to pick the best 1 or 2?. If you want to put the deleted ones back, then that is fine by me. As an aside, there was a very striking one titled something like "Janet on Striding Edge", which I think has been removed because its author didn't give proper copyright information. Bob BScar23625 19:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Several issues here. In general I think the gallery was and is too large, especially for an article that is currently quite short. To quote from Wikipedia:Images, "Articles that use more than one image should present a variety of material near relevant text. Three uniformed portraits would be redundant for a biography of a famous general." Ideally the gallery shouldn't be there at all; it's just a holding ground for pictures that people add until there's enough text to put them near. A better solution would be to create a category or a page on Wikimedia Commons and move most of them there; then, as the article grows, photos can be sourced from there and placed at appropriate points. I was planning to do that, but most of these pictures don't currently exist on Commons and it would be a fair amount of work to upload them.
As for people, I personally think it's preferable if pictures that illustrate a geographical feature don't give too much prominence to people (which is not the same as saying people shouldn't appear at all); in broad terms, it should be primarily a photo of the landscape rather than primarily a photo of people. (Of course, if people are illustrating the text in some way – say if the article mentions a climbing route, and the photo shows someone doing the climb – then a close-up is quite appropriate.) I'd say your (Bob's) pic of the summit is perhaps not ideal in this respect, but it still illustrates the summit and so serves a useful purpose. This one, on the other hand, could be almost any fellside in Lakeland if it wasn't for the small chunk of Thirlmere in the background, and seems to be more a photo of your companion than of any notable topographic feature. These are of course my own personal opinions, and other editors may disagree.
I think the only pictures I removed were the one I've just mentioned, for the reasons given, and the one of Helvellyn from Coniston Water. In the latter case I followed much the same logic: it's primarily a picture of Coniston Water, not of Helvellyn. In fact it's not even certain which dim and distant mountain is actually Helvellyn; what is apparently the highest fell looks like Fairfield to me, with Helvellyn being the highest point of the massif to the left. (And incidentally it doesn't have any people in either!) The ones I left were all good photos that in some way have the potential to illustrate the article; even if some are redundant, I didn't think they merited outright removal just yet. But in general this article needs text more than it needs photos. --Blisco 19:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blisco. No problem. I agree that more text is needed, but a photo gallery where people can display their "snaps" probably does no harm so long as it is at the end of the article. Perhaps a clear-out once a year might be useful?. You have explained yourself, so if you wish to revert my changes I will not object. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 19:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to official policy, Wikipedia articles are not "mere collections of photographs or media files with no text to go with the articles." The place for people to put their snaps is Wikimedia Commons, and to that end I've created and populated a Category:Helvellyn. Enjoy! --Blisco 21:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This issue of removing photographs is getting ridiculous. Who is playing judge, jury and executioner? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timst (talk • contribs)

Don't take it to heart. We must remember that this here is an encyclopaedia, and non-encyclopaedic content may end up being removed. No-one is on trial, and there is no sentence; we are people who are trying to work together to make a useful reference work. I think Blisco has acted perfectly reasonably. By all means discuss which photo best illustrates the article, but I think the current selection is probably as good as any. --Stemonitis 09:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I feel the suggestion that the article is not textually large enough to accomodate several photographs is false. What happened to "a picture speaks a thousand words"? Surely the purpose of the article is to inform. Several of the photographs that have been removed served to illustrate the magnificent natural beauty of Helvellyn and the surrounding area. No additional text was necessary. Tim Stevens 15.00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Tim. You inserted some fine images created under ideal conditions. Whenever I go to Helvellyn, the visibility is less than 10 metres. But all four of them seemed very similar. Blisco has retained the best one of them. Surely, that is sufficient?. Bob BScar23625 17:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. Tim took some excellent pictures, the best one of which (IMO) is at the bottom of the page waiting for some text to illustrate, and all of which are available here for anyone to use as they see fit. But this is an encyclopedia ("a comprehensive written compendium", my italics), not a photo gallery, and our aim is not to "illustrate the magnificent natural beauty of Helvellyn" but to describe the mountain in a neutral point of view. Illustrations should enhance the text, not act as a substitute for it. --Blisco 20:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would disagree. Surely one of the main groups of people who view this article are those planning to climb Helvellyn. There is now no photograph showing the "classic" route via Striding Edge, Helvellyn, Swirral Edge and Catstye Cam. That is one of the reasons I posted such photographs. Not for any personal attention (the photos are available elsewhere), but to give a guide to anyone planning the ascent. The "purpose" of the article is a moot point. I understand that the article is not a photo gallery, but photographs are (to many people) more informative and enjoyable than excessive text.Tim Stevens 10:00, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Sorry to keep banging on with the same old point, but this really is an encyclopaedia. People looking for route information and pretty pictures would be better off looking elsewhere. The purpose of an article is clearly given in a variety of policy documents; we must explain why Helvellyn is notable and how. If (some of) its notability rests in a particular route of ascent, then that should of course be mentioned. I certainly think there's a place for describing Swirral Edge and its place in English hiking. What the article should not be, however, is a travel guide. --Stemonitis 10:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that we still have a couple of pictures in the gallery which are more of people than of Helvellyn, ie 'Janet on Striding Edge' and the summit group 15th April. Would anyone object to (or support) their removal?Bobble Hat 23:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should delete the summit group picture - it adds very little. However, 'Janet on Striding Edge' is an excellent photo as the person gives a clear idea of the scale of this geological feature - a picture of striding edge without a person makes it difficult to work out how wide the "edge" is. Just my opinion... Euchiasmus 06:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The summit group picture does offer something. If anyone wants to replace it with a better image of the summit, then that is fine. I am not biased by the fact that the figures are me and my 17 year old son. The same personalities appear in the Cross Fell article. We went a bit further west than usual on the day of our vist to Helvellyn. Bob BScar23625 16:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added what I hope is a better shot of the summit, and incorporated the most relevant and illustrative photos into the text. (The positioning is a bit messy at the moment, on my display at least, though that could possibly be improved by rejigging the text a bit and adding some more section headers.) If anyone disagrees with my choice of photos, feel free to alter. I don't think the Janet pic does contribute much - Image:Striding Edge.jpg does just as good a job of illustrating the scale, if you look at it closely - but if it is included, it should probably be captioned "a walker on Striding Edge", since her name is irrelevant unless she's notable in her own right. --Blisco 23:27, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me. --Stemonitis 10:21, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. And makes more sense to have pictures in relevant sections rather than a gallery. Bobble Hat 09:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Glad you like it. Thank you for providing some text to put the pictures next to! --Blisco 14:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Second or third highest?

[edit]

Please see my question on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skiddaw discussion page as it is relevant to this page too. 88.109.64.130 15:05, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found this page through a link from Google Earth, Google Earth currently shows Hellvellyn in the wrong location in the Lake district. Perhaps one of you with more knowledge than me could put this right for the benefit of others - C —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.143.169.124 (talk) 21:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

recent accidents

[edit]

There is a bit that says:

Striding Edge is a notorious accident spot among hikers and scramblers. Conditions on the ridge in early 2008 were described as the worst in 30 years by fell top assessor Craig Palmer. Despite the warnings, two walkers died after falling from the ridge in separate incidents in the following weeks.

I am removing the words "despite the warnings". There is a strong implication of blame in that phrase, so I think we should avoid it unless there is some source to firmly establish that the warnings were still considered current at the times of the accidents. The main warning was made on the 5th [1], and by the 6th the conditions were already said to be improving, although a warning remained in place [2]. The accidents happened on the 9th and the 12th [3]. — Alan✉ 20:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, only one of the recent fatalities was on Striding Edge. The other was on the other side of Helvellyn, by Brown Cove. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timst (talk • contribs) 11:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Helvellyn Striding Edge 360 Panorama, Lake District - June 09.jpg to appear as POTD soon

[edit]

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Helvellyn Striding Edge 360 Panorama, Lake District - June 09.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on August 27, 2010. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2010-08-27. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng {chat} 16:16, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Helvellyn, Lake District
A 360° view from the middle of Striding Edge near the summit of Helvellyn, the third-highest peak in England, located in the Lake District. Helvellyn is the tallest summit just to the right of centre. Red Tarn is the small lake on the right, Catstye Cam is the fell directly behind Red Tarn, and Ullswater and the village of Glenridding are visible on the horizon along the far left corner.Photo: David Iliff
Archive – More featured pictures...

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Helvellyn/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 12:52, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What an interesting and nicely-written article. I'll take this on. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:52, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. See the few comments below.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. lead: ok; layout: ok; weasel: ok; fiction: n/a; list of peaks is appropriate.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. See the few comments below.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. All from Commons with correct copyright status.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. All perfectly relevant, including many fine photographs, excellent work.
7. Overall assessment. This article is a worthy addition to the GA list. There are signs of definite passion for the mountain, but the content and language are fittingly encyclopaedic. It is almost ready to pass as soon as the minor comments below are addressed. Congratulations, and good luck with further development of the article. It would be great to see it at FA one day.

Comments

[edit]

Mineral veins do exist: perhaps say (and wikilink) which minerals attracted the miners' interest, both in the lead and in the Mining section.

Suggest merging short paragraphs (geology, botany) in the lead.

Perhaps mention and wikilink some of the poets in the lead.

known to W. A. Poucher. Perhaps say briefly who he was.

It's a shame that the very helpful map of the ridges does not show the walks and their starting points as named in the article - they would make the text easier to follow. That could be a separate map, of course. Certainly not a precondition for GA.

Twitter: wikilink.

Solway Firth, Cheviot Hills, Pennine Hills: wikilink.

Tourism, shepherds: also foxhunting on foot in the area, if you can find a reference.

William and Dorothy Wordsworth: should wikilink the first mentions, not the second.

both of which appear pale and bleached in winter.[45]:197 Both of these grasses: perhaps get rid of one of the "both"s.

Response

[edit]
Many thanks for taking a look at this article so promptly - I was expecting quite a wait when I saw the waiting list! Thank you too for the suggestions, most of which I hope to address in the next few days.
The suggestion about a map would indeed make the "Routes" section easier to follow. The existing map covers only the area around the summit to illustrate the topological features. Unfortunately all the routes except one start from further away, which was why I didn't try to include them. I was also a little cautious in the Routes section, wanting to draw attention to the many possibilities but without turning it into a guide book. I'd hate to think of anyone trying to go up the mountain relying only on an encyclopedia article, and not using a proper map and/or guide book to plan their route! However, if another small sketch map would make the section easier to read that might be worth doing. That could take me a little time to create though - computer drawing is not my strong point! Silence-is-infinite (talk) 09:43, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:31, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
All edits completed, apart from the new map. I hope to spend some time working on that on Wednesday. Silence-is-infinite (talk) 11:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Got the new map finished. Silence-is-infinite (talk) 09:29, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Name

[edit]

Many thanks to 151.227.6.72 for providing what I take to be Collingwood's etymology of Helvellyn. However, since this is not given in any of the sources cited in the article, we really need a citation for it. If you do come back to this page, 151.227.6.72, it would be very helpful if you could add the source of your information, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silence-is-infinite (talk • contribs) 10:26, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed this for now (before I checked here). Whaley (2006: 163) mentions another of Collingwood's etymologies ("an inversion compound with OE hlāw 'mound' or ON hváll 'hill' as 1st el., and pers.n. Willan as 2nd (1918, 103)") but not this one. The reference is 'Mountain Names' CW2 18, 93-104. There's a chance the Road to Hel etymology might show up in there. C1614 (talk) 09:50, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Geology

[edit]

The image entitled "Pieces of lapilli-tuff from the Helvellyn Tuff Formation, found on Catstye Cam, showing dark-coloured, flattened lapilli in the rocks," technically correct but the correct term for the "flattened lapilli" is "FIAMME," and is actually flattened pumice.Most of the volcanic tuffs that form the Borrowdale Volcanics show fiamme.The Geologist (talk) 13:57, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this clarification. However, what do you make of a sentence on the Lapilli page, which reads, "Welded tuff textures are distinctive (termed eutaxitic), with flattened lapilli, fiamme, blocks and bombs forming oblate to discus-shaped forms within layers"? Is that making some distinction between the two terms, 'flattened lapilli' and 'fiamme'? I notice too that the Fiamme page describes that term as merely "descriptive and non-genetic." I wondered about adding fiamme in parenthesis to the image caption, but don't want to add unnecessary levels of complexity here, especially if they are not strictly necessary. Any further thoughts on this would be welcome. Silence-is-infinite (talk) 17:26, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Helvellyn. 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) 14:17, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Less-recent accidents

[edit]

I seem to remember, years ago, reading or hearing something about a man. presumably quite an eccentric character, who tried to ride a horse along Striding Edge, with fatal consequences for both himself and the horse. There seems to be nothing online about this, though. Did I imagine it? Is it an urban a rural myth? Or does any other Wikipedia user know anything about it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.185.206.198 (talk) 17:06, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Helvellyn. 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) 23:46, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

[edit]

Is Helvellyn derived from the Welsh/Cumbric - and therefore "correctly" pronounced with the delightful welsh "ll", or is it well and truly anglicised now? 78.149.135.147 (talk) 09:39, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd quite desperate like to know this too, after all this time I'd hope to find an answer here as it was the first result from my slightly convoluted google search. Was it originally pronounced this way or is it merely coincidence? Does Cumbric (Cumbrian?) have 'll'? 86.188.5.148 (talk) 20:26, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This covered in the Names section in the article. The short answer is no. Helvellyn has always been pronounced in the English rather than Welsh fashion.
Please note that I have moved this new discussion to the end of the talk page OrewaTel (talk) 11:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Helvellyn&oldid=1207616322"