Talk:Flat Holm

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleFlat Holm has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 30, 2008Good article nomineeListed

Merging[edit]

The Flat Holm Battery article really needs to be merged into this one. I have access to a few books about the history of the two islands, which I'll dig out next time I'm at my mother's. --ajn (talk) 16:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

7th century retreat[edit]

I came upon a reference here to Flat Holm as a retreat / medical treatment centre in the 7th century. Is there any more information on this? Ghmyrtle 22:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help with referencing facts[edit]

Tony (talk) contacted me on my talk page for help with referencing facts. Obviously I'm happy to help, but am bringing the question here so that others can pitch in.

Tony asked "We have a wealth of information on every aspect of Flat Holm... My question is how should we reference facts which come from our own leaflets and reports etc? I've looked at the guidance and various examples but still not sure."

I don't see anything wrong with citing publications produced by the island society. There are a large number of citation templates but choosing the right one is tough. Maybe you could use cite press release, or cite study, or cite book. Perhaps others could make some suggestions.

Obviously the most original sources (ie scientific studies etc) are preferred and no problem citing them, just give all the info about authors publishers etc to prove their reliablity. Leaflets are less reliable beacuse they often don't cite references themselves, and often don't include info about authors or even publishers. One suggestion would be to try and get Cardiff Council Flat Holm Project or The Flat Holm Society to post them as pdf files on their websites, then you can reference those.Derek Andrews (talk) 23:17, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One thing is sure, to get to FA status you will need to cite a range of sources.

Good luck and let us know how and when we can help. --TimTay (talk) 11:55, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some good referenceable material in section 3.5 this document (PDF) from Cardiff Harbour Authority, and throughout this document (PDF) from Cardiff Council. --TimTay (talk) 14:21, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed there is a ref:"Cardiff Council Flat Holm Project Geology Study 2008" this really needs more information if you have it, such as publisher=Cardiff Council ? . Derek Andrews (talk) 23:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

I don't think images of all the plants etc are needed (unless they are unique to the island) as a reader can click on the link to find out more about the plant. I've uploaded some GFDL images specifically of the island which can be used for illustration.— Rod talk 17:18, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the plan is to keep the Flat Holm artice lean so I've noted which of the referred to articles need work and will be going through them all. I will also be commissioning new images of unique or rare flora and fauna on the island, such as the blue slow worm and put the images from the commons to add a bit of interest in the meantime. Thanks for help and advice Tony (talk) 07:50, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the list of plants is too comprehensive. First, I don't think that all the descriptions are needed (they can presumably be found by following the wikilinks) unless the information is specific to something about the island (ie if the teasels were harvest as a crop and exported or used in the island wool industry - I'm making that up by the way!). See Wikipedia:Good article criteria 3b. Bearing in mind WP:N the list may want to be shortened to those plants that are special to the island. See also Wikipedia:Embedded list; it may be more appropriate to list in prose the medicinal plants used by the monks, and another section of prose for the rare / endangered plants. Derek Andrews (talk) 23:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That looks good now. You may want to add Wild Peony (Paeonia masculaa) to Wikipedia:WikiProject Plants/Article requests. I was reluctant to do this my self since I found a reference at Peony to Paeonia mascula (Balkan Peony) and wonder if they are one and the same thing?Derek Andrews (talk) 11:10, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

? ready for GA nomination[edit]

This article has undergone some great improvements over the last few weeks and I have rated it as "B" class. I think there a few issues to be ironed out and then it would be ready for GA nomination.

  • What units are preferred - imperial (metric) or metric (imperial) as both are used in the article.
  • The lede needs to be expanded to take into account all the new content see WP:Lede
  • Monks & Vikings includes 2 phrases which need rewording or adding citations "it is said to have been" & "are known to have"
  • Possible conflict in the Marconi section with the dates & info on Telegraphy
  • A citation is needed for the Palmeston forts & Victoria & Albert & various other points - I've added citation needed tags
  • Moncrieff pits might need explaining as Moncrieff carriages links to Disappearing gun & talks about disappearing gun emplacement
  • Do gun & shell sizes need metric equivalents?
  • Who did South Glamorgan County Council lease the island from - ie who is the freeholder?
  • Is it geologically accurate to say the "remains of the northern folds of the Mendips"? & should this be in Geology?
  • What does "The Flat Holm limestone member of this section is unique to the island." mean?
  • The ref after "smuggling" needs more detail

I will work on some of these - but if others with the relevant reference sources etc could help that would be great.— Rod talk 22:14, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Rod - and welcome back. It would be great if you can help us get these sorted. A lot of the refs can be improved as I have a big box file of original papers - but I'm still learning how to use the templates properly, so if you see that I'm getting it wrong please let me know. I'd also appreciate your views on the amount of content. For example, there is a lot of good referenceable material about the fog horn station that I've not put in yet - but although I've looked at a range of GA's I'm still not clear when to draw the line... Tony (talk) 12:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've had a go at expanding the lede, moved some of the sections around & combined one sentence paragraphs. Several of the references say "Flat Holm Project Public Information" - these need to have the title of the document & if possible the author, date of publication etc. I'm not sure what "(By a relative)" means in ref 6. There are also the "citation needed" tags - but I think its getting there.— Rod talk 19:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've now added refs for the outstanding "citation needed" tags - but can we agree on the units for numbers ie metric(imperial) or imperial(metric) as we need to get this consistent before any GA nomination.— Rod talk 19:49, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Been through all of these and followed similar articles with metric(imperial) as the standard. Still waiting for details of the freehold, which I believe is with the Marquess of Bute estate but no ref yet. Am confused by no mention of Marconi in the Telegraphy article but we are consistent with Marconi and I have a number of good refs for the dates, so what do you suggest please? Tony (talk) 15:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've done some more converting units to metric(imp) but we still need this for 115-lb & 7 tons (care what sort of tons). Not sure if 13.5 kW needs converting? Re the marconi issue the best would be to edit Telegraphy into line with this article & Marconi & then let any discussion take place there.— Rod talk 16:48, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've edited Telegraphy as suggested - its a rambly article but at least we are consistent. Thanks. Tony (talk) 07:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think 13.5kW could only be converted to something totally archaic (horsepower) or scientific (joules/second) and devoid of meaning. Derek Andrews (talk) 17:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think the gallery should go. I would like to see the main aerial view could go in the geography section. The a.v. of the farmhouse is harder to place, but maybe the gun section? I'm not sure the other photo adds much and could perhaps be deleted? Derek Andrews (talk) 17:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've done 115-lb but need to know whether we are talking Long tons (probable) or Short tons (possible). I agree about kW & also about the gallery - I'm not sure of the aerial photos adds anything over the one in the infobox?— Rod talk 19:04, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How about just putting a ref to Commons Flat Holm pics instead of the gallery? I've seen it done on other articles but not sure if its good practice? Tony (talk) 19:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like a good way of handling it - is there a suitable category on commons? if not one needs creating.— Rod talk 20:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I like the idea of doing away with this gallery. A good gallery of a discrete number of pictures is fine and can enhance an article. But galleries on Wikipedia often seem to be invitations for people to upload their second rate photographs. This gallery has only a couple of pictures, all good, rather than second rate, but it does not enhance the article. --Blechnic (talk) 02:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Seems we have a consensus so I've created a Commons category for Flat Holm and replaced the Gallery - and I've arranged to have some new photos taken for the category. So what do we need to do next? Tony (talk) 07:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well done - where copyright permissions allow it would be god to put the other images in the article into that category on commons.— Rod talk 09:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The links to Pharos leads nowhere helpful. I can't find anything much better at wiktionary. Can I suggest the links be deleted and replaced with something like ..a pharos (a brazier mounted on a wooden frame)... which is taken from http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/walk/xhm80/flatholm.htm -- Derek Andrews (talk) 09:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Rod, was that you moving my edits around or am I going nuts? Which punctuation / ref format do we want to use? I'm stopping now anyway. Derek Andrews (talk) 10:13, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if it was I didn't spot any edit conflicts>— Rod talk 10:37, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not your fault. I was still in edit, preview, edit, preview loops. You may want to check I didn't screw your edits in the monks and viking section. Anyway, I think I got all the punctuation - refs standardised now. -- Derek Andrews (talk) 12:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes I wonder if we are all going nuts - but then I get feedback from all sorts of different places so it is worth getting this right. I looked at Pharos and agree - but the ref suggested is a lift from p13 of Worrall and Surtees (which I got from Glamorgan Archives) so have amended it. Not sure if the brazier stub is worth a link? I've been trying to standardise my refs to the recommended tempates and revising any earlier efforts Tony (talk) 10:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. I think the brazier link is ok, it does mention them being used as a source of light, but that article would benefit from a picture of a brazier used as a light. -- Derek Andrews (talk) 12:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By all means link to stubs. This is how I found some of the first articles I edited, from stubs and red-links in featured articles or at featured picture pages. It might get some good new editors. --Blechnic (talk) 01:26, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quote from Angle Saxon Chronicles[edit]

I found this in the paper by Worall and Surtees: Anglo Saxon Chronicles - 914 – in this year a great naval force came over here from the south of Brittany and two earls, Other and Hroald with them. And they went west round the coast so that they arrived at the Severn estuary and ravaged in Wales everywhere along the coast where it suited them. Yet they stole inland by night on two occasions – on one east of Watchet on the other occasion at Porlock. Then on both occasions they were attacked so that few of them got away – only those who could swim out to ships. And then they remained out on the island of Flatholme until they became very short of food and many men had died of hunger because they could not obtain any food. Then they went from there to Dyfed and from there to Ireland: and this was in the Autumn.

In some other articles this sort of thing is included as a quote but I'd appreciate views on whether it adds usefully to the history section and thoughts on copyright. (Worall cites Whitelock D's 1961 revised translation of the Anglo Saxon Chronicles.) Tony (talk) 14:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would just work the 2 "factoids" "south of Brittany" and "two earls, Other and Hroald" into the existing sentence on 914.— Rod talk 15:08, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A few more issues before GA nomination[edit]

I've done some more copy editing but have a few more points before this could be a GA nomination:

  • Details of the freeholder (& how & when aquired) still needed.
  • In "Monks and Vikings" how could Edmund Tournor farm it from 1542 to the end of the 17th century?
  • In "Archaeological investigations" BC is used for the date in "Monks and Vikings" BC/AD are not used
  • Can we get first names for H. Ratcliffe-Densham & H. J. Thomas? Looked fo rit and found loads of refs but all using initials Tony (talk) 15:10, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • In Shipwrecks there seem to be 4 short sentances relating to the William and Mary could these be combined?
  • In Marconi - which was sending & receiving ends? opening sentence says Lavernock -> FH & then we have recieving at Lavernock & sending at FH. This was well spotted as we'd got it the wrong way round in two places - found a good image though Tony (talk) 11:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]
  • Lighthouse - What was the pharos "inadequate" for? "the Holms" is introduced here should that term be used earlier or explained?
  • What does "crown patent" mean?
  • 1819 is there a better term than "built up from"?
  • Do we still have a coal fired brazier until solar power in 1997? when was it electrified?
  • Farm House - when was the island "granted" to the Abbey of St Augustine & why/who by?
  • Do we need the word "extensively" in the phrase "extensively renovated"?
  • The first 2 short sentences of Flat Holm Battery could be combined & worded better as they seem to duplicate each other
  • In gun batteries we have the vicar visiting once a year linked to buildings. An annual service is also mentioned in mission to seafarers.
  • Should 4.5 inch be converted as a size or is it the name of the gun? It's a name/type of gun, see QF 4.5 inch naval gun (also, addded wikilink). --RedHillian (talk) 23:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Geology - is that the "west coast" of England, Wales or the island?
  • OK "west" removed but do we need to clarify coast of England v Wales?— Rod talk 11:56, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My source (Ratcliffe-Densham) is vague about this. The limestone reaches both coasts - so do we say that perhaps? Tony (talk) 14:33, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Found ref in 'History of the Lighthouse'Tony (talk) 07:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • When was mining carried out? Found ref in 'History of the Lighthouse'Tony (talk) 07:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should there be mention of proposals for the Severn Barrage?

As a general point - the history & buildings sections jump around through various dates- could this be made more logical/chronological? These comments come from trying to look at the article as a new reader (eg a GA reviewer) would & are meant to be constructive.— Rod talk 10:27, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that the lead is too long / detailed, but not broad enough in coverage (no current use, no geology or geography). Also possibly inaccurate re habition in view of the Bronze age finds? I will try and rewrite the lead and post it in my user space for review, later today, but I do have to go get to work now:( -- Derek Andrews (talk) 12:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed this: "1773 the Society of Merchant Venturers of Bristol petitioned Trinity House for a lighthouse. The petition failed, so in 1735". Dates conflict. -- Derek Andrews (talk) 14:31, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Got spot - changed to 1733 per http://www.trinityhouse.co.uk/interactive/gallery/flatholm.html. — Rod talk 14:56, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As an outside observer of all the excellent work people have been putting in, I've noticed one or two factual and grammatical errors still, and am also concerned about the lack of coherence of the first two parts of the History section in particular which, as someone else said, shoot about all over the place in terms of chronology. I'm happy to play around with this later today if none of the established editors mind - it would be too long to list the changes I'd prefer to see. Two specific questions though :- (1) Is there any information on the dating of the graves discovered - "Celtic" is pretty indeterminate, but to me probably implies somewhere between the Roman and Anglo-Saxon periods; and (2) In the Geology section there is mention of caves used for smuggling - who by, and when? Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:42, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any help is really appreciated - I find that every time I look at it I spot something. I've got a photocopy of the original report about the graves and they admit to having a real problem dating them accurately from the remaining bones. I'll research the smuggling as there may be an interesting story there Tony (talk) 13:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A good smuggling reference here. (ghmyrtle, having logon problems) 213.40.115.152 (talk) 17:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Made a few changes/corrections - apologies for my continuing inability to learn how to do references properly, and thanks to those who sorted them out! Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Re reference to Gytha - not sure what may be deemed "unreliable" - the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle may well itself be unreliable, but it is an undeniable fact that the ASC says she visited the island, and that is of interest in itself. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:33, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While trying to find refs for some of the outstanding issues I came across Flatholm Island, Vale of Glamorgan which says "More modern gun positions were put on the Island during the Great War of 1914 –1918" we have no mention of this in the article - any other sources?— Rod talk 20:54, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Although this is plausible I haven't come across any refs in all the military history papers I've been through - but there is mention of the WW2 gun emplacements damaging the Victorian sites Tony (talk) 06:48, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) Thanks for all the work on improving and expanding this article. I feel it should now be nominated for WP:GAC - there is generally up to a month delay before review which still allows time for further improvement - but I think it will meet the GA criteria.— Rod talk 15:55, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You were right it has taken a few months to get this up to GA status but I agree we should go for nomination. I am nearly at the end of my pile of Flat Holm archive papers, so it's mostly tidying up now - and I have gained useful experience so thanks for pointing me in the right direction Tony (talk) 06:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unanswered questions[edit]

In order to continue to overhaul of the article to GA standards, I would like the editors help (if possible) in answering a few questions that are unclear in the article. As many of the sources are not web-based, it is difficult to track them down to research these outstanding pieces of information. I plan on revising sections of the article over the next few days and as I go along I'll provide comments in this section. Thanks! -Epicadam (talk) 04:26, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1) Who was Dr. Turner? He's mentioned as visiting the island but without any mention of who he is or why he was there.

Possibly - Fellow, Royal College of Physicians, Treasurer of the Royal College of Phyiscians, Metropolitan Commissioner, Physician Extraordinary to Queen Adelaide (see Peerage.com) & house surgeon and apothecary of the Manchester Workhouse (see Spartacus).— Rod talk 08:30, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes we have a copy of his memoirs in the archive. Dr Turner was touring the west country on holiday and, as explained in the article, was stranded due to bad weather on Flat Holm. The justification for including his description of the farm is that some accounts incorrectly suggest that it was not really a farmhouse but more of an Inn, (which it later was). Are you suggesting we should say more about him – or removing the reference to him? Tony (talk) 13:01, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No. He should definitely be mentioned. I just wasn't sure what profession he had just because I'm not sure that it's clear in the first mention of his name who this guy was, why he was there, and why he had anything to do with an archaeological site! I'd suggest moving the information about his profession and reason for being there up to the first instance of his name so it just doesn't appear out of the blue...Epicadam (talk) 16:16, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2) As for the graves mentioned in early history, is there an approximate date for them? I'm assuming that because they had celtic crosses, that means they were from the same period as St. Gildas?

From a previous edit by Tony- "I've got a photocopy of the original report about the graves and they admit to having a real problem dating them accurately from the remaining bones." It would be useful to have the text of precisely what the report says, and reference details. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:24, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hrmm... would it be inaccurate, then, to say something like "Researchers have had difficulty providing an exact date of the graves but are most likely from the early Middle Ages starting around the 5th century AD." -Epicadam (talk) 16:16, 11 June 2008 (UTC)?[reply]

3) Who is H.J. Thomas?

H.J.Thomas is Howard Thomas, a former Investigator for the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historic Monuments in Wales and author of many publications relating to the interpretation and conservation of sites of archaeological or historical interest in the old (1974) counties of Glamorgan and Gwent. I don’t think we need to include any of this in the article other than to properly name him as the person who undertook the investigation in 1979? Tony (talk) 11:08, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How was The Middlesex lost?

This is not from the Flat Holm archives and the ref given isn't helpful but I can't find any trace of it on list of wrecks - although there are others, so should they be included (instead)? Tony (talk) 12:11, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is a list on PastScape but the amount of information on each wreck varies.— Rod talk 15:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hrmm... then maybe we should restrict which wrecks are mentioned to those that actually have detailed information? On the Bermuda Triangle page, which is probably best known for its wrecks, it selects only a handful of them to mention in any detail and then provides an external link to a complete database... perhaps we should do the same here? -Epicadam (talk) 16:16, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

5) Is the 2002 internet link significant? There are many WiMAX systems used to provide internet access over large distances. It would be significant if it were the first, not just one of many in Wales...

All local public infrastructure is significant. See WP:UKCITIES#Public services.--Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 14:50, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's significant if the infrastructure is still there... it doesn't say if it's in use or active, or was just a one-time publicity stunt, etc. -Epicadam (talk) 16:16, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The infrastructure is very much still there and we are now implementing the latest Video Conferencing and Webcams over the link (which Marconi would have appreciated) - but should this be included in the article? Tony (talk) 10:01, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

6) Why are Edmund Tournor and Joseph Robins important? Are they mentioned simply because they were known residents of the island?

No - as they were the Lease holders, Tournor and Robins had an imporetnat role in the history of the island - compared with thoose who just visited or worked on Flat Holm. Tony (talk) 11:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First Radio signals over water?[edit]

The opening statement in the lead needs to be amended. Marconi's achievement that day was the first radio signals over open sea, but NOT the first over water. Marconi benefitted from the active encouragement of then Mr. William Preece (later Sir William Preece) who was Engineer-in-Chief of the Post Office and had himself transmitted radio telegraph morse signals across Coniston Water eight years earlier. 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 23:25, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good point  Done Tony (talk) 09:31, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Pass[edit]

Link to GA review can be found at Talk:Flat Holm/GA1. epicAdam (talk) 18:44, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

width and depth swapped?[edit]

I'm not willing to edit the article directly because of it's status. But aren't width and depth of the Moncrieff pits swapped? As the guns were allegedly 361cm long, a diameter of 2m would seem awfully tight. Dcutter (talk) 14:26, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Helipad connection to WW2/defence role?[edit]

The section on the Second World War concludes: "Flat Holm's helipad still remains, however, at the centre of the island."

There cannot be a connection to the war, because helicopters barely existed at the time.

The helipad may have been constructed later by the MoD, but even that seems doubtful?

Grant | Talk 03:08, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The helipad isn't "in the centre", it's along the NW coast, between Farmhouse and Castle Rock Batteries. It is WWII, but it was built as a poured concrete base for the WWII hospital block (not the old cholera hospital site, that became the NAAFI). When Flat Holm was covenanted to Glamorgan as a nature reserve in 1977 and received SSSI status, part of this covenant required the demolition and removal of much of the WWII historical buildings(!). I think the hospital went at that time. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:51, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Flat Holm. 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 or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 14:00, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Flat Holm. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 17:59, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Flat Holm. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 14:21, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Flat Holm. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 05:11, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Flat Holm. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 04:04, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • OK, except that landregistrybusiness.gov.uk one does not seem to work. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:15, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Once an extension of Mendips?[edit]

Is that true - the deep channel in the seabed approximating the extension of the ice age river Severn runs NE-SW between the islands of Flat Holm and Steep Holm with Flat Holm on the Welsh side so it would seem that the island is more likely to have been connected to the mainland to the west rather than the Mendips to the east. The quoted source dates to 1902 - how reliable is that or was it just supposition on the part of the author/s back then? cheers Geopersona (talk) 19:59, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, that looks a bit suspect. Surely someone has looked at this more carefully since the pretty non-notable Francis Knight in 1902? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:11, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Accuracy and clarity[edit]

Hi Ghmyrtle, I have revised the text for the following reasons: (1) The inclusion of Welsh translations seem appropriate. (2) The historical subdivisions used also reflect the historical subdivisons in other Wiki articles. There is nothing contentious about using: Bronze Age, Sub-Roman, Middle Ages. These are accepted terms used in peer reviewed academic articles. They are certainly better than the clumsy terms used in the original article. (3) The historical information in the lede is already covered in the main body of the article. Also, this approach is similar to the lede in the Steep Holm Wiki article.

Keeping the names the same in the Geography section is fine apart from keeping the Welsh translation of Steep Holm, i.e. Ynys Rhonech.

Thanks for your input. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C7:3CB7:CE00:505C:688C:BB68:2EB1 (talk) 15:37, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You need to bear in mind that this article (unlike most others) is a "Good Article", so high standards of editing need to apply. In particular, the article should meet the standards set put in WP:MOS. It's correct to include the Welsh name of the island itself, but not of other features like the estuary or Steep Holm that have their own articles, and not to duplicate them. Essentially, this is the English Wikipedia, and repeated mentions of the Welsh names are contrary to guidance. The purpose of the lede is to summarise the main article - it is absolutely normal and correct for material in the main text to be summarised in the lede, per WP:LEDE. I don't see any problem with retaining the second paragraph of the lede, but I have tweaked the wording. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:26, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:53, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welsh etymology[edit]

Does "Echni" translate as "energy"? The word also appears in the "Trem Echni" area near Rhoose. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Flat_Holm&oldid=1210603184"