# Talk:Dubh Artach

GameKeeper, I have just added the box on the article page, and the co-ords in Nicholson (1995) are slightly different from the ones you added at the top. Yours may well be more accurate. If you believe them to be so could you amend the box accordingly or vice versa? (Nicholson only quotes degree and minutes, no seconds). Thanks, Ben MacDui 16:23, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I have removed my coords and switched your coord template to add the title coords GameKeeper 16:34, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

In addtion to the photo it would be great if someone knows the source of the painting used as this bookcover.

http://www.silveradomuseum.org/images/rls2.jpg
If its over 100 years old then Template:PD-art may apply. Edit by GameKeeper

I am investigating, but no luck so far. Ben MacDui 12:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Mystery solved - according to the NLB the painting is by Sam Bough. I am afraid the title on the image frame is just a guess. However if anyone knows how to get hold of a copy of the original booklet - 'The New Lighthouse on the Dhu Heartach Rock, Argyllshire. Edited with an Introduction by Roger G. Swearingen (1995)' by RLS, which is probably out of print, I'd be pleased to hear from them. I have contacted all four organisations on the cover. None are available in Scotland; no reply from the USA as yet. Ben MacDui (Talk) 21:47, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Copies are currently available in the US. Details on application. Ben MacDui (Talk) 08:46, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

This information is derived from MacFie, Macduffie and Dubthaigh, all of which emanate from the same User source and which link to the web page specified by the Clan Macduffie Society reference. I have not actually read the original documents although my limited grasp of gaelic suggests that the derivations of the names are at least plausible. See also Talk:MacFie.  Ben MacDui Talk 10:04, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[Continued from User talk:Blisco] My gut feeling is that the Macduffie connection is a red herring. The explanation here that the name derives from an uibh-hirteach seems at least plausible, though I'd like to see a more reliable source for it rather than anonymous "modern etymologists". Dubh Artach and Dhu Heartach are almost certainly variant forms, but it's not necessarily a "phonetic" anglicisation as such; it may follow older Scottish Gaelic or Irish spelling conventions, and/or reflect an older pronunciation, or may even be a cartographer's error. Note that the letter H isn't used as a consonant in its own right in modern Gaelic, though the sound is represented by combinations such as th and sh.
Given the similarity with the Irish form of Dooherty, it strikes me as possible that folk etymology was at work (i.e. the original name was Dhu Heartach, but as this was an unfamiliar name to Gaelic speakers and the personal name Dubh Artaich was familiar, the name of the rock was reinterpreted as deriving from the personal name). However, this is pure speculation and shouldn't really be in the article unsourced, though I've included it for now with a {{fact}} tag in case anyone can back it up.
My best suggestion is to pare it down to the hard sourced facts, and keep an eye out for any books that might provide a better answer. --Blisco 23:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Bit late as a response but I've only just come across this ; )  The Dubh Artach and Dhu Heartach issue is easy. The pronunciation of this given is wrong - it should be [d̪̊uh arˠʃd̪̊əx] and the final [h] in pronunciation latches onto the next word if it starts with a vowel (cf English cases of an uncle ~ a nuncle) which leads to the re-interpretation of Artach > Heartach. As far as the etymology goes, I'm not sure of the need to go looking for fancy etymologies, artach is a good (if now obsolete) word for rock or stony ground (see good old Dwelly).
I'm also not sure where the funny etymology for Dooherty comes from... most reliable sources on Irish surnames give the etymology as < dochartach 'hurtful' or (in case of the variant Doorty) dubh 'black' and art 'bear' (that's an Irish root not commonly found in Scotland). So I think  given the nature of the object, the obvious meaning is the right one. Akerbeltz (talk) 09:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. The phonetic hieroglyphics are a complete mystery to me and I have no objection to them being changed. If you can provide a Dwelly reference I'll amend the text for that interpretation (and/or the "reliable sources on Irish surnames") if you like. Cheers. Ben MacDuiTalk/Walk 18:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
I've redone it and added the references. Personally I'd be inclined to remove most of the specualtion... it sounds like it's purely speculation anyway (there are references but they're about the etymologies of the surnames, not the place name). For one thing, if the rock was named after someone, that would involve genitive case marking in Gaelic and you'd get (for example) *Creag Dhubhartaich in Gaelic but not with -ach at the end... we could remove the speculation and see if someone comes along and can point to a source which lists the speculation, we can revert it. What do you think? Akerbeltz (talk) 19:40, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for doing this, it is all rather more clear now. The original version began as an short attempt to explain and ended up taking on a life of its own. As you have no doubt seen I have replaced some references and other bits of pieces that I think are still relevant. A question I have is that it now reads "suggesting *hartach or heartach to the untrained ear." Is the asterisk intended? It doesn't convey anything to me I'm afraid. Ben MacDuiTalk/Walk 08:27, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Pleasure. The asterisk is intended, it is used in linguistics to mark words which are "theoretical" but are not recorded as such. For example, if I wrote a history of the word Jedi and wanted to theorise that this comes from an earlier form Jeddiq because of some general rules about Star Wars names that I've discovered, then I would have to mark it as *Jeddiq because it's pure theory and there is no record anywhere of such a word. Akerbeltz (talk) 09:12, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Found a page that explains the asterisk, added a link Akerbeltz (talk) 09:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the trouble to explain this. Fascinating stuff... Ben MacDuiTalk/Walk 20:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
You're very welcome : ) Akerbeltz (talk) 21:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at WP:LEAD. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.
This article has no images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under WP:IUP and WP:IT that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.
See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.
Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space - &nbsp; between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of undefined, use undefined undefined, which when you are editing the page, should look like: undefined&nbsp;undefined.
When writing standard abbreviations, the abbreviations should not have a 's' to demark plurality (change kms to km and lbs to lb).
As per WP:MOSDATE, dates shouldn't use th; for example, instead of using January 30th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.
Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Ben MacDui (Talk) 20:23, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Getting really close, but only one thing bothers me:

The Later events section, point 5, doesn't completely explain why the name of the lighthouse was changed from Dhuheartach to Dubh Artach. Is there no real or speculative reason to be found? If so, just say so, but your second paragraph implies that there is more infomation to be had on this subject?
I have updated this list to include only the remaining point that I feel is left and I'll update the 'On Hold' status.
BTW:Looking at you use of the word 'probably' again, I understand that must be a quote from your publication.
Fluffball70 09:50, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Update
That's a much better explanation! While I agree that a recent photo whould be nice, it's not necessary for GA status and all the other points have clearly been adressed.
Only one thought, which GA catagory would this be listed under? Historic Buildings? Fluffball70 10:01, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks. I didn't know there were GA categories, but that one would be fine if there is one! Ben MacDui (Talk) 17:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, I e-mailed the West Lothian Sub-Aqua club and they gave us permission to use their picture from their website on Wikipedia. I've uploaded the picture here and left it for someone else's choice on postiton and size, but you may want to licence it better:
File:DubhArtach.jpg
Bet you thought I'd forgotten about this article ;) Fluffball70 08:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I've created a location map as requested on Scottish Wikipedians' notice board. The image is based on a non-scalable png file. If you would rather loose the contour information but have the image of lossless quality let me know and I will make it a vector graphic image.
I struggled to put it on the main page and have it look nice. I feel, in this case, having Orkney and Shetland on the map is distracting. At some point creating a location map without Orkney and Shetland might be a good idea as for showing locations they distract from the message trying to be put across. I suppose I should discuss that elsewhere.
Also I don't know if you would rather have a higher quality image, but still zoomed in to the west coast? An idea which has just occurred to me is to create a vector image with all of Scotland small in a corner, with a box drawn on it to show which section of the west coast we are showing in more detail. What do people think of this idea? I'll have a play when I have some time. 
I've left the new map on the main page as even with the drawbacks it seems better than what was there. Mehmet Karatay 21:24, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Its a great improvement and many thanks.... and I agree about Orkney and Shetland. Ben MacDui (Talk) 19:17, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
The map does not integrate properly with the standard infobox. I've asked for some assistance. Ben MacDui (Talk) 09:42, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Dubh Artach/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.
 This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.
This is a really nice article with which I only have two issues:

The sources used need to include the page number(s) of the books/journals being relied on for the information.
The lead is just a little too short to adequately summarise the article.
--Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 00:03, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully all fixed. Ben MacDui 19:37, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
That's brilliant, thanks. Just one remaining question; there are a few citations to Stevenson (1872), which isn't included in the sources. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:50, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Scrub that, I see what's happened. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:53, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Dubh Artach. 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/20070928083347/http://www.nlb.org.uk/ourlights/history/dubhartach.htm to http://www.nlb.org.uk/ourlights/history/dubhartach.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928083347/http://www.nlb.org.uk/ourlights/history/dubhartach.htm to http://www.nlb.org.uk/ourlights/history/dubhartach.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060903210657/http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/s/stevenson/robert_louis/s848mp/complete.html to http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/s/stevenson/robert_louis/s848mp/complete.html#chapter8
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: 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) 09:13, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dubh Artach. 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://archive.is/20100402164153/http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/statistics/publications-and-data/occpapers/occasional-paper-10.html to http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/statistics/publications-and-data/occpapers/occasional-paper-10.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) 10:57, 14 September 2017 (UTC)