Talk:Rivelin Rocks

Yorkshire Low‑importance

	Yorkshire portal Rivelin Rocks 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.

Sheffield Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sheffield, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sheffield 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.SheffieldWikipedia:WikiProject SheffieldTemplate:WikiProject SheffieldSheffield articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Location

The article apparently contradicts itself. In the first section it claims the rocks are on private property. In the second section it claims the rocks are within the bounds of a National Park.

They could fall across a boundary, but the article is not specific enough to be clear. 82.68.152.186

Apologies if I'm being presumptious, but it sounds like you're thinking of national parks in the USA sense, where I believe they are publicly owned and preserved as wilderness. In the UK version of national parks, plenty of land is privately owned. They are not preserved as human-free wilderness areas, but as regular countryside (with private land, agriculture, buildings, small settlements, even light industry) with added protection to prevent over-development. Does this answer your question? --VinceBowdren 15:38, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting

Any idea what is wrong with the formatting on this document - the edit links are at the end. I have had a look but cannot spot an obvious issue (the refs are all okay). RobChafer 14:05, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think they got pushed around when you have pictures on the right-hand side of the page, which take up the position the edit link would normally go. --VinceBowdren 17:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]