Jump to content

Talk:List of Hewitts and Nuttalls in England

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

Pennines

[edit]

I am a little confused by the division of the Pennines employed here, into East, West, North, South, Yorkshire Dales and Peak District. To my mind, the Pennines are divided into North (between A66 and A69, roughly), Yorkshire Dales (inc. Howgill Fells; A66 to A59), and the South Pennines, which may or may not include the Peak District, but does include from Winter Hill to Ilkley Moor. Calling Wensleydale "South Pennines" and Burnhope Seat "East Pennines" seems very odd indeed. Does this scheme follow a published source? Do the Nuttalls do it like this? --Stemonitis 09:51, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned here, I'm not convinced by this either. The areas are the same ones that the Nuttalls use, but the names are not entirely. The Nuttalls have:
  • The seven Wainwright regions (in the order N, NW, W, C, S, E, FE)
  • The Cheviots
  • North Pennines — the Western Fells (Cross Fell etc.)
  • North Pennines — the Eastern Fells (Burnhope Seat etc.)
  • Yorkshire Dales — the Northern Fells (Great Shunner Fell etc.)
  • Yorkshire Dales — the Southern Fells (Whernside etc.)
  • The Peak District and Dartmoor
The Nuttalls don't have a two-level region structure. I think the one I applied on the Welsh list improved it; I don't know that this one has. I think the root of the problem is that "The Pennines" means two things: it means the long mountain range that stretches from Northumberland to the Midlands (and may or may not include the Cheviots and Peaks); but it also means, to me at least, the smaller section between the A66 and A69 that doesn't have a name of it's own. So the main section heading used the term in the former sense; the three subsections, the latter sense. Not ideal, I realise.
I didn't adopt the Nuttalls' names because, to me, the Yorkshire Dales is the area between Skipton and Wensleydale, despite the Howgills, etc., are part of the national park of that name. But perhaps that's just a consequence of the part of Yorkshire I grew up in. — ras52 10:35, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[Edit conflict] Right. I think the divisions I suggested before are closer to common usage. Certainly, the OS maps follow that scheme: OL21 (South Pennines) covers Marsden to Barnoldswick, while OL31 (North Pennines) covers Bowes to Alston (cf. North Pennines AONB). I don't see any need to divide the North Pennines into two subgroups — the Southern Fells of the Lake District is just as long a table. Pennines doesn't mention a possible second interpretation, and it's not one that I've come across before. I would like to hear what others have to say, but I would advocate the following:

  • Cheviots
  • Lake District (divided along Wainwright's lines)
  • Pennines
  • North Pennines
  • Yorkshire Dales
  • Peak District
  • Dartmoor

This is closer to the Nuttalls' scheme, and to (my perception of) common usage. --Stemonitis 10:53, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is that an improvement now? — ras52 10:46, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've shifted the Cheviots out of the Pennines, but apart from that, I'm happy with it now. I think two levels of headings are clearer than three, but it's only a weak preference. Thanks. --Stemonitis 10:57, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't thought of the Cheviots as part of the Pennines either, but according to the Pennines article, the Pennines "form an unbroken range stretching from the Peak District in the Midlands, through the Yorkshire Dales, parts of Greater Manchester, the West Pennine Moors of Lancashire and Cumbrian Fells to the Cheviot Hills on the Scottish border." But if it's arguing the Cumbrian Fells are part of the Pennines, it's clearly using a very broad definition. Anyway, I'm happy with it as you've changed it. — ras52 11:18, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Counts

[edit]

It would be nice if, in the intro paragraph, the number of Hewitts, Nuttalls, and Marilyns was shown (i.e., "There are a total of X Hewitts and Y Nuttalls, with Z of them additionally classified as Marilyns."). howcheng {chat} 16:44, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added. The numbers I have written there are based solely on the numbers of rows of different colours in the tables, so if anyone makes any changes to the tables (adding or removing peaks, or changing their status), they will have to update the counts accordingly. --Stemonitis 16:56, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. In that case, I think we have an error. The Nuttalls' book list 251, and there are the two new ones (Honister Crag & Birks Fell). The TAC Hewitt booklet lists 178 to which Birks Fell should be added. So we seem to have gained a Nuttall and a Hewitt. Or more likely, two hills listed twice. I can't immediately find them… — ras52 08:58, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Black Mountain? --Stemonitis 09:05, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Did you include the Black Mountain in your count? It's not in the tables here, just noted in Note 3. Also Viewing Hill was listed twice. — ras52 09:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is in the tables here. I found Viewing Hill as well, but removed the other one of the pair; it should be fixed now. --Stemonitis 09:13, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So, is 254, counting Black Mountain (and there's no good reason why one wouldn't one count it), the right number? Shall I change the DYK entry to 254 / 179? --Stemonitis 09:15, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I hadn't noticed the BM had been added. Sorry about that. The Nuttall's 251+2 does not include the BM, so 254 is accurate; the 178+1 Hewitts does include the BM, so that is now correct too. If you could change the DYK entry, that would be good. — ras52 09:19, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Stemonitis 09:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope nobody minds that I have corrected the name listed for Gregory Chapel (Yorkshire Dales,, Northern Fells) - it was shown as Archie Styrigg. But for reasons outlined in the new article, this "alternative name" is not correct for the actual high point, even though for some reason it seems to be the more popular alternative among hill walkers. OldFaw (talk) 14:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prominence

[edit]

Why are exact prominences given for so many tops? A lot of these must be estimates, where there is no spot height at the col. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.163.143 (talk) 11:59, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pavey Ark.JPG Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Pavey Ark.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 19 July 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:57, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Blencathra.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Blencathra.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files missing permission as of 15 November 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:45, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Hewitts and Nuttalls in England. 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) 04:07, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Hewitts and Nuttalls in England. 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) 13:01, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Updates needed

[edit]

See the Nuttalls' own website: http://www.nuttalls.com/mountains/2000.htm - Calf Top, Tinside Rigg and Long Fell are missing (but Miller Moss has just been added - see this). PamD 16:29, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2016/11/17/hill-sleuths-celebrate-birthday-with-news-of-three-new-hill-classifications has the grid refs and heights for Tinside Rigg and Long Fell. PamD 16:54, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose to re-direct page

[edit]

Two new articles have been created, List of Hewitt mountains in England, Wales and Ireland, List of Nuttall mountains in England and Wales, which are October 2018 downloads of the Database of British and Irish Hills (DoBIH) for Hewitts and Nuttalls.

These articles also have linking to individual Wikipedia articles (including Grid Ref linking). They have the DoBIH parent peak for Nuttalls (as per other new Wikipedia articles on Munro Tops and Donald Tops), and linked to their individual peak Wikipedia articles. In addition, they have the full classification listings for each individual peak (e.g. whether it is a Birkett etc.). The Nuttall article also has a DoBIH column called "Area (Nuttalls)" which is the DoBIH estimate of the most appropriate area title that is reflective of the structure used in the Nuttalls book (while respecting some specific issues with their structuring). The new articles were downloaded automatically and required no manual intervention (except to select columns and fix some links), so OR issues are minimal.

In contrast, this article has data which is old (many height and prominences have changed), is un-sourced (e.g. a BBC researcher could not quote this data), and has a break-up of peaks into Sections which makes it hard to update the tables by download (Nuttalls and Hewitts, given their low prominence, are more prone to changes). This article also contains "parent" peak data for every Nuttall and Hewitt which is not appropriate. The DoBIH only record "parent peaks" for peaks which are not in themselves parents (e.g. parents do not have parents), or which are not so isolated that a parent title is not meaningful. We should go with the DoBIH approach, who are experts in this area (e.g. parent peaks are core to prominence calculations) and avoid the approach taken in this article, which I think is confusing.

However, time and effort have gone into making this article, so I did not want to REDIRECT myself without checking first. Britishfinance (talk) 13:37, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Have also updated the new Nuttalls page to rank by prominence so a reader can see how many Nuttalls are Hewitts and Marilyns and P600s etc. Britishfinance (talk) 11:08, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Hewitts_and_Nuttalls_in_England&oldid=1203648714"