Talk:Lost Johns' Cave

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caves, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of caving and cave articles 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.CavesWikipedia:WikiProject CavesTemplate:WikiProject CavesCaves articles

Yorkshire Low‑importance

	Yorkshire portal Lost Johns' Cave is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Name of the article

My understanding is that the name should be Lost Johns' Cave not Lost John's Cave as there were two people named John who were lost. Need to identify the orginal write-up. --Tim P (talk) 20:23, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube

I did not add the link to the YouTube video: [1], but tried to tidy it. I believe that YouTube links may be used on Wikipedia with discretion. Some may view YouTube as a whole as not being "encyclopedic" and I would have to agree. But in this case, I can think of few links that explain qiute as well what it's like in Lost John's. Have no strong view. Just saying. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:41, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One problem I have with that Youtube clip is that it doesn't show what Lost Johns' is like - only a very small part of it which is very atypical. I also think a clip showing a fairly inexperienced caver getting into difficulties without getting much support from his colleagues puts caving and Lost Johns' in a pretty poor light. However, by all means put the link back. I wouldn't want to fall out over it. Langcliffe (talk) 16:38, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're right it is one small part (I wouldn't expect to see a video of an entire trip!) And you're also right, it might put caving and/or Lost John's into a poor light (although, as you may know, "experience" is not always a good predictor of getting stuck!) But overall I think it gives an jdea of what caving can be like 100 times better than any textual description. I wonder if any better video clip might be available or made available. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:30, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lost John's Cave. 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/20130301014754/http://cncc.org.uk/leck_fell.html to http://www.cncc.org.uk/leck_fell.html

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) 05:47, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lost John's Cave or Lost Johns' Cave?

Currently the title uses the former while the rest of the article use the latter. Digging through the internet gives both results and I'm not informed enough to decide which one. (I might suspect circular spellchecking too) Felixnyancat (talk) 09:06, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing in my original copy of Northern Caves: Volume 4. But did you see this? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:13, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The first written reference is by Balderstone in 1890 when he referred to "Lost Johns' Cave". The cave was properly explored by the Yorkshire Ramblers Club in the 1920s and 1930s. In their exploration reports, they also refer to "Lost Johns' Cave" - see here for an example. Langcliffe (talk) 09:53, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the note at the very bottom of that report says "[Knowledge of the story of the two lost Johns, and the evidence of the books which mention the cave, have compelled the Editor to revise his grammar and adopt a plural form.]". Martinevans123 (talk) 10:03, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The latest edition of the caving guide book "Northern Caves. The Three Counties System and the North-West" published in 2017 also uses "Lost Johns' Cave" (page 163). The associated web page has a very comprehensive bibliography. Langcliffe (talk) 10:22, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Northern Caves: Volume 4 by D. Brook, G. Davies, M. H. Long and J.R. Sutcliffe e.g. here, uses exclusively "John's". Martinevans123 (talk) 10:31, 13 July 2021 (UTC) [reply]

Done Have now moved. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:12, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]