Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Orkney islands
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: 11 days, 4 support, 0 oppose. Promote. Scorpion0422 14:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This list uses a similar format to the Featured List of islands of Scotland, but adds highest point names, smaller islands down to 20 ha and a comprehensive listing of smaller islets and skerries. I believe it meets the criteria and whilst I am not a copyright expert I have checked the availability of the images used. Ben MacDui (Talk) 14:25, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Some of the uninhabited islands were previously inhabited, any way you could fit in the last known year of habitation? Kappa 21:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It would be possible for those which were inhabited in relatively recent times, although for those with neolithic etc. remains it would be speculative. I'll look at the data and see what can be done. Ben MacDui (Talk) 07:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- This has now been attempted. I will look for some more information, but the smaller the island the harder it is likely to be. Given my current information all that could be done would be to add 'Neolithic or later', 'Norse or later' etc. Ben MacDui (Talk) 14:46, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you, I like this list much more now. Kappa 00:01, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- And given that the sorting problem appears to have been fixed I will support the nomination. Kappa 21:50, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- This has now been attempted. I will look for some more information, but the smaller the island the harder it is likely to be. Given my current information all that could be done would be to add 'Neolithic or later', 'Norse or later' etc. Ben MacDui (Talk) 14:46, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I think the asterisks in the "area" column causes it to sort improperly (in reverse order, Glims Holm is placed before Orkney Mainland). Circeus 22:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Curses. My browser is still 'non-sorting', which is how I failed to notice. I'll fix this asap. Ben MacDui (Talk) 07:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, it was working at this end. I changed the asterisk to a footnote, which may help. I notice that the Area column does not always sort properly for some reason (whereas the Population one, which also has footnotes, always does). However, if this happens it seems to fix itself if you sort another field and then go back to Area. I can't see any obvious reason for this. Ben MacDui (Talk) 08:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I fixed it. --Golbez 01:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Many thanks. Ben MacDui (Talk) 13:23, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I fixed it. --Golbez 01:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, it was working at this end. I changed the asterisk to a footnote, which may help. I notice that the Area column does not always sort properly for some reason (whereas the Population one, which also has footnotes, always does). However, if this happens it seems to fix itself if you sort another field and then go back to Area. I can't see any obvious reason for this. Ben MacDui (Talk) 08:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - notions of habitation are variable. Some are visited seasonally - like Sula Sgeir (not one of the Orkneys!) and lived on, by shepherds, fowlers or rich people! --MacRusgail 16:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair enough. I have added - "For uninhabited islands indicates the last known date of permanent, year round settlement." to the relevant footnote. Ben MacDui (Talk) 17:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- No problem, I appreciate this is a nitpick, but some of the uninhabited islands still retain inhabitable houses, which are lived in from time to time. I'll take a further look at the article. A lot to digest here. --MacRusgail 18:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC) p.s. I think the Shetland list should be redesigned more on this model.[reply]
- Support Meets all the Featured List criteria. Lurker (said · done) 10:18, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support with copyedit and two caveats:
- Thank-you for your support. References copyedited (again).
- It looks silly having the n/a for "last inhabited" of currently populated islands.
- Replaced n/a with blank and inserted 'unknown' where applicable.
- "skerries which are only exposed at lower stages of the tide." is ambiguous tome, possibly because I'm not British and an ASL speaker. It could mean either that these islands are connected to mainland at lower tide, or disappear completely at high tide.
- I fear it was my ambiguity. It is both/and, and the wording has been amended accordingly. My understanding is that a 'reef' is a rock which may be a navigation hazard, but which is not normally exposed, whereas a 'skerry' is a small island that is usually or regularly exposed. Some skerries in Orkney may be both tidal islets and skerries in that they will become separated only at mid-tide but vanish during high tides. Hopefully it is clearer now. Ben MacDui (Talk) 08:35, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Circeus 01:30, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]