Talk:Isle of Lewis

	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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Scotland High‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

UK geography Mid‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Islands

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands 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.IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject IslandsTemplate:WikiProject IslandsIslands articles

Archives

Archive 1

Archive 2

Untitled

Copy edit for WP 0.7 completed save for fact tag for "home of the poet". I can find numerous other suggestions in e.g. Haswell-Smith, Hamish (2004). The Scottish Islands. Edinburgh: Canongate. ISBN 978-1-84195-454-7. I'll come back in a couple of days and change this unless a citation can be found. Ben Mac Dui 08:47, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Myths and legends

This article has a "myths and legends" section. I'd like to examine this for verifiability because of some doubts about sourcing.

Here is what it looks like at present:

The Blue Men of the Minch (also known as storm kelpies), who occupy the stretch of water between Lewis and mainland Scotland, looking for sailors to drown and stricken boats to sink.
Kelpies were said to occupy several lochs, including one at Leurbost.
Seonaidh - a water-spirit who had to be offered ale in the area of Teampull Mholuaidh in Ness.
Searrach Uisge - a monster who was said to occupy Loch Suainbhal. Resembling a capsized boat, this creature has been reported swimming around for one and a half centuries. Locals say lambs were once offered annually to the creature.[37] Other such creatures have been reported in several other lochs, including Loch Urubhal.
A family of werewolves were said to occupy an island on Loch Langavat. Although long deceased, they promised to rise if their graves were disturbed.
Various sea monsters have been reported off the shores of Lewis over the years, including a sighting reported in 1882 by a German ship off the Butt of Lewis. The ship, 15 kilometres off the coast, reported a sea serpent around 40 metres in length, several bumps protruding from the water, along its back. Sea serpents have also been reported at the southern side of the island.
Glowing Balls have been reported in the area of Sandwick. The lights that float around the area normally announce approaching death for a local. Some say the light belongs to an Irish merchant who was robbed and murdered on the island.

Much of this isn't a lot of use. For instance, a family of werewolves, long deceased? In what century? Which island of Loch Langavat? For this kind of tale, I'd expect to find a reference to a collection of oral history or folklore, but there is nothing of the sort. Since I began to type this section I've noticed this posting on another site which echoes my own concerns about reliability.

Much of the sourcing seems to come from a website called The Paranormal Database. I've discussed this at the reliable sources noticeboard and the consensus is that as a self-published source it's not reliable. I am removing that section from the article as of now. If reliable sources can be obtained the information can be restored. --TS 11:13, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored a sentence on Seonaidh about which we have an article and (apparently) reliable sourcing. --TS 11:20, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've put The Blue Men back in, linking to a book on Scottish Myth and Legend, published in 1917, as a reference. Given how well they are known (far more than Seonaidh), it's a bit disappointing to have to do that. Lianachan (talk) 13:20, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, but bear in mind that sassenachs and others from the great outer beyond wouldn't know a blue man from Doctor Who and his blue box. That's what reliable sources are for. --TS 13:31, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talking of Dr Who, I have a snippet about the "Phantom of the Seven Hunters". Although referring to a ghost that reputedly inhabited (inhabits?) the Flannan Isles, it is presumably a piece of folklore from, if not specifically about, Lewis. Ben Mac Dui 19:41, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Name of the isle

I tweaked this but am not sure I understood correctly. Is "Heather Isle" = Lewis and Harris? Ben Mac Dui 19:41, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I now notice that the Collins Encyclopaedia of Scotland thinks leodhas means "marshy" too. Ben Mac Dui 19:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I tidied the section up a wee bit, putting the two candidate toponymy sources togther and apart from the (vastly earlier) mention by Ptolemy. Heather Isle, in my experience, is almost never used - but does tend to refer to Lewis & Harris together, yes. I'll check my placename books and sources for some consensus on the origin of Lewis. Personally, I prefer the Gaelic one - although I can see how it could have been reverse engineered quite recently from the Ptolemy reference. Lianachan (talk) 22:25, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOL reverse engineered? Backformed you mean - language is not a car ;) Akerbeltz (talk) 02:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, perfectly aware of that, thanks. The expression was chosen for it's comedic value, so I'm glad it appears to have given satisfaction. Lianachan (talk) 09:07, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heights of the hills on Lewis

I notice that information on the heights of the hills has come from the 1911 edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica. The list of Marilyns gives updated information for the same peaks, and appears to give the Gaelic spelling of the names:

Mealisval 574m 1883ft , Beinn Mhor 572m 1877ft [1]

At present, the wording reads:

"Compared to Harris, Lewis is relatively flat, save in the south-east, where Ben More reaches 1,874 ft (571 m), and in the south-west, where Mealasbhal at 1,885 ft (575 m) is the highest point"

Updated and with the above information this would read:

"Compared with Harris, Lewis is relatively flat, except in the south-west, where Mealisval, 574m (1,883ft), is the highest point, and in the south-east, where Beinn Mhor reaches 572m (1,877ft) "

As these figures are slightly different from that of the 1911 book it's probably better to go with the the more recent information. Michael Glass (talk) 16:42, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ownership history

What precisely happened to the ownership of Lewis when Leverhulme died in 1925, and subsequently? The Lewis and Lever pages are not consistent. Grahamsands (talk) 13:16, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Lewis page is not so much inaccurate as that it fails to cover the issue. The Leverhulme page, which provides more detail is partly accurate. It say "After offering to give Lewis to its people in 1923, but being turned down and selling it onward to absentee landlords..". The story as I understand it is that Lever offered the land for free, but not as a single large unit. His idea was to split the estate up into a a dozen units (or possibly one larger unit and to give all the crofting land away - I've seen both ideas suggested). It seems crazy now but eleven of the proposals were turned down - but the crofters were by this time fairly sure of their position and may have guessed that running a country estate was potentially a recipe for losing money. The Government were asked to help but turned the idea of offering support for running costs down. The twelfth was Stornoway and Lochs - which to this day is largely owned by the Stornoway Trust. Remarkably they don't seem to have a website and what little info I have is probably out-of-date. Ben Mac Dui 18:59, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation

Can I say just how completely bizarre and unexpected it is for Lewis to continue with "(Scottish Gaelic..." and be about a Scottish island? This page should be a disambig. —Felix the Cassowary 22:31, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can't have looked at many Scottish geopages, most of them list the Gaelic right after the English name. As for dab/no dab i think that has been debated before. Akerbeltz (talk) 00:38, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, see Talk:Lewis/Archive_2#Requested_move Akerbeltz (talk) 00:39, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move (2012)

This discussion was listed at Wikipedia:Move review on 10 December 2012. The result of the move review was Close endorsed.

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Cúchullain ^t/c 15:05, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lewis → Lewis, Outer Hebrides – There is such a huge long list of things and people called Lewis, that something would have to be extremely prominent to qualify as primary topic for this name. This region in Scotland is not. In fact, it is little-known outside Scotland, and I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of English and Irish people hadn't heard of it. As far as the non-primary nature of this name, there are ten towns in the United States named "Lewis", Note that the general practice of including state names with US place names provides no valid argument, since it doesn't make Boston a secondary topic, does it? Anyways, with so many Lewises in the world, this page should be a disambiguation page. Ego White Tray (talk) 13:40, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support No way this is a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. --BDD (talk) 17:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What about Isle of Lewis? It's the name they use on their tourist website. Kauffner (talk) 19:44, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It is the primary topic in Scotland, and although that may carry little weight with some, a prominent argument of the previous move request at Talk:Lewis/Archive_2#Requested_move was that it was the primary topic more generally. There is no doubt that "Isle of Lewis" gets a lot of use, (although Lewis is not an island) but if it is to be moved then it should be to Lewis, Outer Hebrides per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) and Harris, Outer Hebrides. No doubt the nominator will offer to fix the 500 plus links to the article if the move is successful. Ben Mac Dui 20:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that quite a few of those links are not intended for this portion of an island. Ego White Tray (talk) 21:07, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even if there are no such unintentional links, I'd fix them all myself. If the move is in accordance with WP:NC, this is a poor reason to oppose. --BDD (talk) 21:13, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is not the reason I am opposing and having looked at the first 250 links I'd say that less than half-a-dozen are not intended for the current article. Ben Mac Dui 09:34, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support I can't imagine most people think of this when they hear the name Lewis. The proposed "Isle of Lewis" makes sense. Hot Stop (Talk) 04:46, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think they do think of? Very few people are going to look for "Lewis" if they are searching for someone with that surname or forename. Ben Mac Dui 09:34, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't need to be a primary topic for such a generic term. Hot Stop (Talk) 13:46, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I expect that most people who type "Lewis" in the search bar are looking for a person named Lewis when they've forgotten the person's first or last name - Meriwhether Lewis is probably a large number of these searches, for example, since he's very famous in the US as the Lewis in Lewis & Clark, but his first name is long and unusual. I expect this region of Scotland to be a small minority. Ego White Tray (talk) 13:21, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom, though Kauffner's alternate name is also fine. Disambiguation should be emplaced at this location. -- 70.24.250.26 (talk) 06:22, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In what way "fine"? It is inconsistent with other usage and not in line with long-standing and carefully considered conventions. Ben Mac Dui 09:34, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is the self-identified name, so is a reasonable name. If you have issue with the tourism bureau, lodge a complaint with them. -- 70.24.250.110 (talk) 12:21, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support move to Isle of Lewis. it is clearly not the primary topic, and Isle of Lewis is the common name in Scotland. And it avoids horribly long names with commas in the middle --Vclaw (talk) 13:31, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Surprisingly. I expected to support the move, but when I looked at the pageview stats, this page got 31,000 in the past 90 days, while the disambiguation page only got 6,000. That tells me that a large majority of people are happy with how they got here. Making "Lewis" the disambiguation page would force extra unneeded navigation for a lot of readers. (Interestingly, Isle of Lewis - the redirect - got over 4,500 views in the same timeframe.) Dohn joe (talk) 20:49, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- But that statistic is biased. People who are looking for a Lewis will type in Lewis, whether looking for this locale or something else, so of course this will have way more page views. A Google search, on the other hand, starts with Lewis University, Lewis County, Washington, C.S. Lewis and Lewis (TV series) - the Scottish location doesn't even figure into it after ten pages of search results. Ego White Tray (talk) 22:33, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  But the point is, everyone who enters "Lewis" right now comes to this page. If they come here looking for a different Lewis, they'll be redirected to the disambiguation page. With 31,000 visits to this page, and only 6,000 for the dab page, it's reasonable to conclude that most people who enters "Lewis" are finding what they're looking for. Dohn joe (talk) 22:47, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For 19 percent of readers to go to the DAB is extremely high. For every reader clicking on the hatnote, I bet two or three are using the backup function or closing the tab. Kauffner (talk) 15:34, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have stats on the typical DAB-usage percentage where there is a primary topic? I'd be open to reconsidering my !vote if 19% is truly an outlier. Dohn joe (talk) 20:06, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A movie is primary for Big, while the DAB gets 2741 / 135364 ==> 2 percent of traffic. Back in April, the novel was primary for Doctor Zhivago, while the DAB got 1,089 / 24,408 ===> 4.5 percent of traffic. This is despite the fact that the film is a more likely desired topic than the novel. Kauffner (talk) 13:18, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate those two examples, but I'd much prefer to see a more comprehensive look at it - if anyone were to do a reasonable study of it, it might even turn into good guidance. Dohn joe (talk) 17:28, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per User:Dohn joe et al. Like others, I reckoned "Lewis" would be a good candidate to be a dab page but a perusal of that page shows very few things called "Lewis" with articles at Wikipedia. The nominator mentions the American towns but only one of these has a population of more than 1,000 souls and one of them has zero inhabitants according to the article. The surname is the only article that even comes close to being as notable. — AjaxSmack 05:11, 28 November 2012 (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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 12 external links on Lewis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:42, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Lewis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:59, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Lewis. 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/20110926234316/http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/vli/language/gaelic/pdfs/placenamesK-O.pdf to http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/vli/language/gaelic/pdfs/placenamesK-O.pdf
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131127115218/http://romanmap.com/htm/nomina/insula/Eirimon.htm to http://www.romanmap.com/htm/nomina/insula/Eirimon.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cne-siar.gov.uk/factfile/environment/wildlife.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cne-siar.gov.uk/factfile/environment/flora.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110923125128/http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/vli/language/gaelic/pdfs/placenamesA-B.pdf to http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/vli/language/gaelic/pdfs/placenamesA-B.pdf

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) 21:27, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Lewis. 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) 04:43, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 18 July 2018

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Isle of Lewis. There is clear consensus that the island is not the WP:PTOPIC for 'Lewis', therefore a move is called for. There is no clear consensus whether "Isle of Lewis" is the best title – but it's certainly a reasonable one – so another RM can be invoked to determine the final destination.
Due to high number of incoming links, I will not immediately execute the move, but try to sort out the links first. If anyone would like to assist, it would be appreciated. No such user (talk) 07:14, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lewis → Isle of Lewis
Lewis (disambiguation) → Lewis

– WP:ASTONISH I cannot imagine the average person who types in "Lewis" would expect to be taken here. Unlike Harris, the name of this place is Isle of Lewis, even though it is not technically an island in its own right. Google searches for "Lewis" (almost no results for the place in Scotland even from England), "Lewis, Scotland" and "Isle of Lewis" show that it is called Isle of Lewis in a generic context. Lewis (TV series) regularly gets more than double page views. The place is clearly the primary topic over the ship named after it so the hatnote to that would remain. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:53, 18 July 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. Dekimasuよ! 16:55, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support. No longer the primary use, according to page views[2] and google[3]. Celia Homeford (talk) 14:00, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rreagan007 (talk) 20:43, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support - absolutely breathtaking. With so many different claimants to PT, such as Meriwether Lewis, I cannot comprehend how this situation lasted as long as it did. Red Slash 14:36, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note If this is done then all pages that use Lewis should be changed to "Isle of Lewis" for example Parkend, Lewis should be moved to Parkend, Isle of Lewis as this move is in difference to the island's name being "Isle of Lewis" rather than "Lewis" which appears to be WP:COMMONNAME, unlike Jura for example. Crouch, Swale (talk) 05:37, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: "Lewis" is both the formal and the common name. Leaving aside the issue that Lewis isn't actually an island, very few Scottish islands have "Isle of" in their name, although this may be preprended in picturesque, fanciful or exonymic usage. The only exceptions I can think of are Isle of May and Isle of Ewe. Nothing has changed since the previous proposals to move this article – please read the discussions from 2012, 2008, 2007 and 2006. --Deskford (talk) 08:58, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Isle of Lewis" appears to be the formal and common name per the sources, not "Lewis". Isle of Bute and Isle of Arran are also "Isle of..." on OS. In addition with WP:PRIMARYTOPIC the place in Scotland got 13,850 views [[4]] while just those qualified with brackets and commas got 32,603 views [[5]] [[6]] [[7]] and there are more than just those topics. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:48, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: per the previous archived discussions, which are indeed persuasive.

I can't imagine searches for the tv series will sustain their level after the course of a couple of years but this island will still be there. Would anyone searching for a Lewis gun really just search for a "Lewis"? I guess many or most people looking for Meriwether Lewis may toil to think of his first name; I'd probably search for Lewis and Clark but otherwise, if I typed in just Lewis, it would be as a starting point with the expectation of obtaining the dab page to narrow the search, not expecting to immediately be taken to the article as a primary topic. OS may prefix its name on the map with "Isle of" but, per Deskford, that's not how one would commonly refer to it; to hear it so-referred in most contexts would sound a bit odd (I'm taking the ferry to the Isle of Lewis?). (Even the Isle of May, which is a case where the prefix is the norm, often just gets "The May" locally, though I've never heard plain "May".) And again, read the copious previous discussions on the matter. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:05, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OS does not prefix Jura, Islay, Coll, Colonsay or Harris, but it does with Lewis, which probably indicates its common name, while just "Lewis" is used locally. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:11, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Showing the comparatively arbitrary nature of the OS designations. I would have said all of these islands could also have "Isle of" stuck in front of their name (although that likewise doesn't make that version their correct name and without it, not), except Harris but if you stick the full term in Google, even it gets significant hits. Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:19, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was pointed out that May and Ewe are part of their names, what is interesting to note is that those with a suffix or prefix generally share their name with another common word, the month and the sheep and with Lewis it is the name. Those that don't, often are mononymous, like Jura, this probably reflects common usage and isn't as arbitrary as might first appear. Might it be worth seeking a wider forum. Crouch, Swale (talk) 06:37, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what is intended by ""It was pointed out that May and Ewe are part of their names".

So used for DAB by the OS in such cases, thus denoting that it is an isle rather than that the prefix is somehow an essential part of its name. Possibly, but it would be useful to see if the OS state this convention, otherwise it is conjecture/OR. Even if there were a case for DAB here, it would not fit with the WP conventions on geographic names, as pointed out in earlier discussions. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:15, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was pointing out that apparently it is agreed that those use the prefix.

It is not being used as disambiguation by the OS, it is being used as part of the name, just like Stratford St Mary, Newcastle upon Tyne and Great Glemham. The links clearly show that it isn't being used for disambiguation, otherwise it would be in brackets. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:31, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I find it hard to see how you draw these elements together to come up with this conclusion, if anything they indicate other. It is pure speculation. If you can find a source that synthesises all these elements to specifically state this, fair enough. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:09, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I don't think we can take Ordnance Survey as a consistent or reliable authority on place names. In any case, the two OS maps I have close to hand here, Landranger 1:50000 Sheet 8: Stornoway & North Lewis (2005 edition) and Sheet 13: West Lewis and North Harris (2008 edition), both use simply "Lewis" in their titles. --Deskford (talk) 11:24, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Vision of Britain appears to have an old map with it showing "Isle of Lewis". Britannica has an article on Lewis and Harris and specifies an alternative title is "Isle of Lewis". If we can't agree on using "Isle of Lewis" then it should be moved to Lewis, Scotland, like Harris. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:31, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So we're agreed on dropping the angle that "Lewis" alone is not the correct name and now debating whether a dab is required? Per above and previous discussions, there is no case for this. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:09, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, my comments were if others still think "Lewis" is the correct name for the article, then my 2nd choice would be adding ", Scotland" to the title. Given the comments about the other maps and sources, that may well be the case, however even still WP:NATURALDIS may make "Isle of" still an option. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:17, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lewis, Scotland would be the most acceptable form of disambiguation, if it is determined that this is no longer the primary topic for "Lewis". I remain to be convinced, however, that a surge in searches for a TV series will constitute more than a temporary blip. --Deskford (talk) 11:55, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree the TV series is probably temporary popularity but as I pointed out earlier there are lots of other things and the name is probably likely to be expected to be found with "Lewis". If "Isle of Lewis" is rejected then I'd prefer Lewis, Scotland per the guideline. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:02, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The guideline would not indicate that solution but Lewis, Outer Hebrides, should dab be appropriate, but that it is the primary topic is what counts most. I find the arguments presented in the 2012 discussion presented by those who were surprised to end up in opposition to be particularly compelling and as pertinent as they were then. Mutt Lunker (talk) 13:25, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. At first glance it looks an obvious move, but on closer inspection, there really is nothing else called Lewis which, even taken together, challenge the island (or half-island actually) to be primary topic. I of course think that the whole concept of primary topic is a bit sus, and would instead have every article at an unambiguous name. But under current policy, no move. Andrewa (talk) 13:17, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination and other "Support" votes. An unsuccessful Talk:Java#Requested move 12 June 2018 proposed that Java, at 145 million, the world's most populous island, be moved to Java (island). Lewis has a population of 18,500 and the Lewis (disambiguation) page lists 39 entries plus numerous additional ones under "See also". The larger, but less populous, Harris has a population of 1,916 and uses the main title header Harris, Scotland. Accordingly, I would also Support the alternatively-proposed analogous form Lewis, Scotland. Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 05:36, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the archived discussions and the discussion above; what has suddenly made this no longer the primary topic, particularly per the end of the 2012 discussion? I'm at a loss as to why the example of a move to dab a clear primary topic that has numerous subordinate topics being defeated is an argument to support a comparable move proposal here. As mentioned in the current and archived discussions above, and linked, were dab appropriate here the guideline states that "Ambiguous place names within the United Kingdom should generally use the county as the disambiguator" so Lewis, Scotland would be wrong as is the existing title Harris, Scotland, so the latter is no example to follow. Harris is not only not larger than Lewis but a fraction of its size. Mutt Lunker (talk) 09:16, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In mentioning the comparative areas of Lewis and Harris, I mistakenly conflated the total territory of Lewis and Harris (841 sq mi) with the territory of Harris alone. In fact, 683 sq mi of that 841 sq mi does belong to Lewis. Additionally, if consensus should coalesce around using Lewis, Outer Hebrides and (although it is not part of this RM) Harris, Outer Hebrides, I would move my support to those forms. Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 01:43, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support move. It's blatantly clear that the page cannot remain at its current title, as this is a textbook "no primary topic" situation. ONR (talk) 07:10, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support, a quick search of Google Books shows that "Lewis" is far more likely to refer to a person named or surnamed Lewis. There is a clear absence of primary topic where there is such a likelihood that this is far from the first thing that will come to mind when hearing this name. bd2412 T 02:45, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Obvious support. This utterly fails WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and WP:COMMONAME and WP:RECOGNIZABLE and WP:PRECISE and WP:COMMONSENSE and principle of least astonishment all at once. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 03:56, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Obvious fail of WP:ASTONISH._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 10:14, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom, fails astonish, I fail to see why this island is the primary topic. Lazz _R 22:07, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Could the last four editors who have expressed support clarify if they are supporting per nom, i.e. Isle of Lewis, or supporting only that DAB is required? Should the latter be accepted*, the debate above and in the section below indicates that there is no clear consensus as yet as to which of the options for DABed titles should be adopted. (*I'll note that I'm as yet unconvinced and hope that those supporting have read the previous debates, particularly the end of the 2012 one.) Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:07, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'll address the "oppose" arguments in 2012. "It is the primary topic in Scotland" WP is global, not just for Scotland, it certainly isn't even primary in the other UK countries. The fact it has lots of links is weak evidence of the long-term significance criteria. The view argument with the DAB was shown to show the opposite. They show that many readers who search for "Lewis" are being taken onto the wrong article because many will have arrived through Google or a link. While those looking for the island often type "Isle of Lewis". Compare views [[8]] for other DAB pages compared to Lewis, often they only get 1 or 2%, in the case of Colchester the article gets over 100x the views of the DAB while it is only over 15x for Lewis! AjaxSmack's argument is more convincing but still the views and WP:ASTONISH show no primary topic. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:31, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Unreal7 (talk) 17:38, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support as proposed. Celia Homeford's evidence shows that this is not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of the name "Lewis", and should be moved. I see no problem with the name "Isle of Lewis".--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:47, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

If we must disambiguate (and I think that for best reader experience we should, but on current policy we should not) then Isle of Lewis is IMO the most recognizable option... quirky, but common and very Scottish. Andrewa (talk) 10:27, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It would thus be appropriate to address your proposal on the policy first and if it is changed, only then would this discussion have validity. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:43, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The first option is to call it "Isle of Lewis" (saying something like "the Isle of Lewis, commonly refereed to as Lewis..." and move other topics like Parkend, Lewis to Parkend, Isle of Lewis. That is to say we are saying "Isle of Lewis" is its proper name and "Lewis" is an alternative name, I think there is clear consensus against this, and the evidence has contradicted my evidence of it being "Isle of Lewis".

The 2nd option is to use "Isle of Lewis" as natural disambiguation meaning that it still says the "Lewis" is its proper name. topics that are disambiguated by it will still just use "Lewis" not "Isle of Lewis" thus Parkend, Lewis would remain where it is.

The 3rd option is to use "Lewis, Scotland" or "Lewis, Outer Hebrides", the latter would be consistent with Jura, Scotland and Harris, Scotland. WP:UKPLACE says "The number of larger settlements or islands that are likely to be well-known outside of the region..." use ", Scotland".

To reply to Andrewa's comment I think this should be moved per policy as well. It clearly fails the first criteria of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC as the TV series gets more views and I think the name has long term significance. I'd say that if you say "Lewis" to someone in England, more than 96% of people will think you mean the given name and the other 4% will think of the surname and that will be even more so in other countries outside the UK. I don't think we should put every DAB page at the base name, but just have primary topics when its clear that a meaning is primary in a general audience. I'd defer to you're arguments about New York and Nancy. If this article is not moved it will continue to confuse readers and editors and this proposal will probably come up again in a few years. What would be interesting would be is to like through a redirect similar to what was done with Lincoln and in a year see how many people searching for "Lewis" want the different articles. Crouch, Swale (talk) 07:39, 28 July 2018 (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.

Post-close comment

That move isn't a good idea. What does it achieve? --John (talk) 09:31, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
WP:PRECISION (lots of topic called "Lewis") and WP:COMMONAME (called "Isle of Lewis" at least sometimes). Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:39, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm currently working on resolving incoming links; out of ~150 thus far, some 5 were totally misplaced. In some 20% of cases, the links were piped as [[Lewis|Isle of Lewis]]; in yet others, it was referred to as "the island of [[Lewis]]". Even before my last batch of retargeting, Isle of Lewis had 461 incoming links (I still have the page open in my tab). I think that it demonstrates that even editors are well-aware how ambiguous the bare "Lewis" is. No such user (talk) 10:20, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "At least sometimes" isn't really COMMONAME though, is it? This is a lousy outcome, please reconsider. --John (talk) 10:24, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  I think the point is that because "Lewis" is a common name, reliable sources (like the OS) commonly call it "Isle of Lewis" (however that was rebutted which then leads to the natural DAB argument) just like Isle of Wight because if people said just ""Wight" people would think you meant the colour, same with Isle of Man, but not Jura. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:32, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That is clearly no comparison as nobody ever refers to "Wight" or "Man". "Isle of" is just part of their name, not a DAB. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:55, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per the closing statement that "There is no clear consensus whether "Isle of Lewis" is the best title", isn't it somewhat jumping the gun to make global changes to links already as if there were such consensus? Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:26, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes. What is the supposed problem that this is attempting to solve? --John (talk) 10:27, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:THREEOUTCOMES there was consensus that "Lewis" shouldn't host an article on this place but no clear consensus on where it should go. The closer then picked the one which was thought to be the best. If you disagree you can start a new RM to move it to Lewis, Scotland or Lewis, Outer Hebrides etc. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:32, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That the closer has "picked... one" seems rather a creative reading of their statement. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:55, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, they said it was "certainly a reasonable one". Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:58, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:THREEOUTCOMES (a section of WP:RMCI) There are rare circumstances where multiple names have been proposed and no consensus arises out of any, except that it is determined that the current title should not host the article. In these difficult circumstances, the closer should pick the best title of the options available, and then be clear that while consensus has rejected the former title (and no request to bring it back should be made lightly), there is no consensus for the title actually chosen. I believe that there is clear consensus that "the current title should not host the article". My closing statement also addressed that "there is no consensus for the title actually chosen." and I picked "certainly a reasonable one" The facts that 1) there already existed 461 direct links to Isle of Lewis 2) WP:NATURAL is generally the preferred form of disambiguation and 3) "Isle of Lewis" was the proposed target, which was explicitly or silently supported by several posters, I think that my close was perfectly within letter and spirit of the rules.
"Global changes to links" I'm performing do not block any potential subsequent move, as the fixed links will continue to correctly point to Isle of Lewis, whether it ends up as the main title or a redirect to another. No such user (talk) 11:15, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, that was my point about it being "reasonable", even though there may be no consensus to call this something other than plain "Lewis". Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:21, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One of the main problems with the article being at Isle of Lewis is that Lewis isn't an isle. Please don't make any more edits in support of this wrong-headed outcome. Please don't make any more RM determinations like this one. It is going to create more work for volunteers in cleaning up the mess you are making. --John (talk) 11:28, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See List of islands of England (the section on those that aren't island), this isn't the only one (take Isle of Purbeck for example), we're saying that's its name, not what it is, that is to say it shouldn't be at Lewis (island). The links are being piped except where "Isle of Lewis" is already used anyway. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:34, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lewis isn't in England. --John (talk) 11:43, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@John: as I already explained, my edits are not "supporting this wrong-headed outcome" – they support the move of Lewis (disambiguation) to Lewis. While I might understand your dislike of the outcome, I don't see how your objections are supported by policy and obvious consensus from the well-attended RM. Particularly, you haven't stated any policy-based reason why my close was "wrong". No such user (talk) 11:57, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and executed the moves; most incoming links have been fixed by Crouch, Swale and myslelf. I believe I closed the discussion correctly and answered the concerns to the best of my ability; please start a WP:Move Review if you still disagree with the close. A new RM for this page is probably the best way forward if you find the current title inappropriate. No such user (talk) 14:30, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There was no consensus to do this. It will have to be fixed. Please be more careful in the future. --John (talk) 15:28, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This was the right, indeed the only close. Well done. Different disambiguation, if necessary, can be hammered out later, the important thing is moving it away from Lewis, as it’s not the primary topic.—Cúchullain ^t/c 15:35, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone can start a new RM to Lewis, Scotland or Lewis, Outer Hebrides etc (I would be mildly against) but as Cuchullain has pointed out at least we've disambiguated it, which was clearly a surprising page to land on when searching "Lewis". A move review in this case would be inappropriate since a new RM can be made as pointed out. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:20, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Scotland regarding this, but I think its moot here as "Isle of Lewis" is likely a common name. Does anyone think this should be moved elsewhere as I will soon start a CFD for Category:Lewis to be disambigated. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:45, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As I haven't had any responses for over a week, I have started the CFD, its here. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:42, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was closed as speedy move, C2D. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:30, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I now accept that "Lewis" is also a correct name for this place however its not been shown that "Isle of Lewis" is incorrect. Thus "Isle of Lewis" can be used per WP:COMMONAME or at minimum WP:NATURAL especially given that its own website uses "Isle of Lewis" along with many tourist websites (which may not be reliable sources though but do show that "Isle of Lewis" is common). The move was indeed made because while there was no consensus if "Isle of Lewis" was the best name for this page, it was clear that its not primary for "Lewis" thus at minimum WP:NATURAL would apply. If there is disagreement between an available title (Isle of Lewis) and an unavailable title (Lewis) then an effective tiebreaker is to use the available title rather than needing to qualify. In terms of the arguments about primary topic:
By PT#1 this shows that there is clearly no primary topic by usage, since even ignoring all other titles such as the gun that aren't qualified the others get more than double views (even the TV series alone gets more than double). This is obviously generous since the place in Scotland will surely be searched for using "Isle of Lewis" frequently. This post clearly shows the problems this is causing to readers (as opposed to many other primary topics).

By PT#2 there may be a weak case that among topic called just "Lewis" that this one is dominant by then we go back to the last question, that is to say how much long-term significance does it have for plain "Lewis" anyway.

By WP:ASTONISH and WP:COMMONSENSE it blatantly fails both since even if it was the most likely search destination it would clearly be very surprising/confusing to most. Thus I think its clear that the move makes it far easier/less confusing to people looking/expecting to find something else and the move was supported by policy, common sense and local consensus and none of the opposers had provided that the move was against policy. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:32, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Clach na Thursa"

I'm from Lewis, although the east side of the island. I've never heard of a place called "Clach na Thursa" in Carloway. Is this just my ignorance? Does it really exist? The name as it stands certainly doesn't fit the rules of Gaelic grammar, although maybe, of course, it comes from Old Norse. The only references I can find to "Clach na Thursa" on the internet are in pages which have clearly copied the list of monuments on this page; and a single one in a list on the Callanish Visitor Centre's site (who you would think would know what they're talking about) which gives no details other than the name.

Can anyone shed any light on this? And if "Clach na Thursa" does exist, what's its correct name in Gaelic? Ceud taing, Cailean99 (talk) 17:41, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is this referring to Clach An Tursa, in Carloway? AlasdairW (talk) 21:18, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That must be it! Thanks. I'll edit the entry to match. Cailean99 (talk) 14:44, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]