Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scottish Islands/Islands by area

message: #66 = which Scalpay? --MacRusgail 09:44, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Scalpay, Outer Hebrides - please note that this list is still incomplete. A more complete list is at list of islands of Scotland which should have greater prominence in the project. Finavon 19:14, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been using both on and off, but find this address easier to access via WPSI. --MacRusgail 11:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Scalpay

message: According to the JNCC the SSSI it is part of, which includes Eilean nan Ron and other neighbours is 221.11 ha. As EnR is only 138 ha I wondered if H-Smith might have missed it. However, as a rough estimate I make it about 26 ha. H-Smith mentions its existence under "Eilean nan Ron", so  it is a good find for the 'Smaller' list. (For future ref the Latitude & Longitude are N58:34:01 W04:39:39 (Lat: 58.567 Long: -4.661)). Ben MacDuiTalk/Walk 17:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There's also Eilean Horrisdale NG787744 - possibly tidal, with some evidence of settlement (Cnoc an t-Sean Bhaile meaning old town hill and Tigh Ghobain - another glorious OS bastardisation which probably is an old Smithy). If you're looking for it, it's near Badachro on Loch Gairloch [sic] (surely it should be just "Gairloch"?!) --MacRusgail (talk) 19:36, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Eilean Hoan

message: This came to my attention courtesy of Heaste. Its a tidal islet of about 20 ha. Ben MacDui 19:56, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Eilean Heast

message: Uyea, Northmavine, Shetland is not on the list, but apparently "125 hectares" --MacRusgail (talk) 13:53, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm more into An Orkney in the Uyea myself. Although as far as prog rock goes, I like some of Pink Floyd's early stuff... --MacRusgail (talk) 19:37, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ooh yeah 

message: The GA review of Gigha has raised a number of issues, including the use of references in the infobox (see Talk:Gigha). The solution was to  use a new format that involves a main reference stating "Infobox source is Haswell-Smith (2004) pp. 37–41 unless otherwise stated." and in-line refs for others. This means using something like "Haswell-Smith (2004) pp. 502–03. Modified to include bridged islands." for the area rank. It occurs to me that we could identify in the table which those are.  Ben MacDui 19:46, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm beginning to think that part of the problem of Wikipedia is its instability. People keep on changing the goal posts. Usually in places which few others know about... who came up with this new format? --MacRusgail (talk) 18:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Pass. You can use Template:Cent to keep track of "central discussions", but there are a lot of them and part of the problem is that some of them recur, with the same arguments repeated ad nauseam. Ben MacDui 18:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox refs 

message: Following from a discussion on the talk page its area has been upped to 86 ha. The following infoboxes needed to be amended. Ben MacDui 15:41, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boreray, St Kilda 

message: This is now included at 66 ha. The following infoboxes need to be adjusted. Ben MacDui 19:17, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Stromay]] 

message: Dunglass Island arrives - estimated at 55 ha but good to have a 2nd opinion before adjusting the lists. Ben MacDui 11:19, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Dunglass

message: A tidal island in Enard Bay at . Approx 50 ha and second opinion requested. Ben MacDui 12:45, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. OS show Calbha Mór as tidal, with an area of 61ha. Its smaller neighbour, Calbha Beag is 31ha. See also and PDF Finavon (talk) 20:03, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Many thanks. Ben MacDui 09:00, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Calbha Mor 

message: The Rick Livingstone tables (above thread) are producing new issues. Some are straightforward in that he provides an estimate that is different from the existing OS estimates. For ranking purposes the current logic is:
* Haswell-Smith is the most reliable source.
* Gazeteer for Scotland and GRO come next as established refs.
* Livingstone's tables are next in rank.
* Our estimates are last in line unless otherwise discussed. 
Perhaps ideally the table would include all the estimates, but that's a task for another day, for me at least.
The only one that I am wondering about so far is Stromay. His estimate of 100 ha is much bigger than our 66 and I suspect includes a lot of rocks covered with water at low tide. Not sure what to do yet.
:: OS shows Stromay as 65 or 66ha along the high water mark, but double that at low water (ie drying rocks). Finavon (talk) 13:29, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: closer to 46ha Finavon (talk) 13:29, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: 31ha at HW Finavon (talk) 13:29, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

text: At a first look, Livingstone also lists the following, which are not in the current area list:
*Gluss Isle - promontory
*St  Ninian's Isle 1.3 km2 - promontory
*Fora Ness - promontory
*Eilean Meadhonach (Crowlins) 77 ha
*Eilean an Taighe 55 ha - joined to Garbh Eilean
*Eilean Dubh Mòr 50 ha
*Flodday (Loch Maddy) 50 ha
*Eileanan  Chearabhaigh 49 ha - group
*Nave Island 40 ha
It becomes more confusing below 40 ha! Finavon (talk) 13:29, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

text: If you are happy with the above i.e. adding Eilean Meadhonach, Crowlin Islands and the other revisions already done, I'll add this to the table and with any luck that's it. Everything under 137 ha will then need to be checked for the revised ranking. Ben MacDui 19:12, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

text: PS I have left Stromay at 66 ha. I presume you want me to downgrade Calbha Beag from the above. Ben MacDui 20:11, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. I fear we may end up with several different lists if we are not careful. However it is still consistent with H-Smith in that he has 162, we have added a further 60 and there are 222 on the list. Ben MacDui 15:57, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well done - I missed the above reply. I think Calbha Beag is fine - I'm sure using the figure that appears to relate to HW is right. It is somewhat reassuring that the current table is supported by 2 independent sources. Finavon (talk) 17:30, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks - it would be good if someone would publish something definitive for freshwater islands, although on the other hand I'd prefer not to have to amend things again for a while at least. Note to self: File:Loch Midhinis - geograph.org.uk - 854594.jpg shows part of  Ceallasaigh Beag. Ben MacDui 18:34, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Tables 

message: According to edits made quoting Caton, Peter (2011) No Boat Required - Exploring Tidal Islands. Matador, the are 17 tidal islands in Scotland accessible from the mainland.
* Hestan, Davaar, Eilean Ighe, Rough Island, Castle Tioram, Cramond, Eilena Shona, Mhic Chrion, and two Islands of Fleet have been edited. That's 10.
* Danna, Eriska, Oldany, Calbha Mor, Eilean Tioram in Loch Gairloch?, Innis Mhòr, Eilean Donan, Eyebroughy - that's 8 more.
There are numerous other tiddlers and I wonder what the lower size limit is. Ben MacDui 21:15, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tidal isles 

message: I've completed a first pass at this. My main aim was to ensure than main lists were not missing anything - happily they weren't although there were a few Orkney Holms that needed 'promotion' onto the main table. It has also thrown up various issues.
* Red links - only Lingeigh, North Uist above 40 ha. 
* Of those between 16 and 40 ha the following is an approx listing by archipelago:
**Shetland - 2 - Little Holm and one of the Lingas;
**Orkney - 1 - Start Point is a redirect;
**Outer Hebrides - 18
**Inner Hebrides - 11
**North Highland - 11
**Mainland sea lochs - 4 
**Freshwater - 2
:::There's an interesting thesis on the psychological geography of the Scottish islands here for all our interns to get stuck into.
*Anomalies for islands >40 ha, which I will come back to.
* In theory, given Livingstone's claim that the tables are a "register of all islands 15 hectares, or more" it would be possible to extend the ranking right down to 15 ha. Potentially tricky and frustrating and not something I'm going to attempt any time soon.
* There are quite a few of the smaller islands, especially in the Northern Isles, that lack an infobox.  Ben MacDui 15:56, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update from Livingstone's Tables 

message: * Complex islands - no mention of Cliasaigh Mor in Loch Maddy or Maithidh Glas/Maithidh Riabhach and Maragaidh Beag/Maragaidh Mòr south of Ronay and east of Benbecula - the first and last of which at least look bigger than 15 ha at low tide.
* Fuidheigh Beag and Orasaigh ditto - both also east of Benbecula. Ben MacDui 16:32, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Less than 40 ha

message: Definition of an island:  "land that is surrounded by seawater on a daily basis, but not necessarily at all stages of the tide, excluding human devices such as bridges and causeways
# For ranking purposes, for islands >40 ha the area is per H-Smith unless no other estimate is available as this provides a consistency of approach.
# The next best reference is GRO for inhabited islands.
# The next best reference is Gazetteer of Scotland, which has academic credentials, followed by Livingstone.
# Failing that any other available estimate from a credible external source. If sufficiently reliable it may trump Livingstone.
# Failing that, an OS estimate.
# Islands may be included in the rankings for >40 ha if there is a reliable source for this, even if that it is clear H-Smith is aware of the island  unless there is some very clear evidence of an error or omission on the former's part. Similarly, if a reliable source exists for the area of an island that Haswell-Smith counts as a multiple island - then what?
# Bridged and tidal islands are included provided they meet the standard "land that is surrounded by seawater on a daily basis, but not necessarily at all stages of the tide, excluding human devices such as bridges and causeways" definition.
# A corollary is that although tidal islands are included their area has to be measured at a stage when they are "surrounded by seawater".
# 'Complex islands' are only included if measured by an external source as there is too much room for errors on OS estimates. Maybe they need their own mini table.
# The same would apply to islands <40 ha except that very few are measured by H-Smith.
# There needs to be some wiggle room here for common sense as Livingstone has made at least one error - see note to Eilean Horrisdale on project page. 
# If there is doubt as to whether or not the object is an island, the Ordnance Survey is the principal reference for determining the extent of high tides. 
#An island may only appear on the list once. Ben MacDui 18:29, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Attempt at an explicit logic

message: * Oldany - contradicts above unless we place Gazetteer higher than RL.
* Eilean Sùbhainn - ditto
* Eriska - the issue here is a mix up between ha and acres (see ref on project page). It is only c. 121 ha according to the hotel website, so RL's 145 ha is fine. Definitely needs fixing.
* Torsa - needs minor adjust to RL's 110 ha as this is an OS est at present I think.
* Hunda - ditto
* Boreray, St Kilda - is OK per No. 4
* Stromay - RL has this at 100 ha but it looks no bigger than Hermetray both he and H-Smith have at 72 ha. An IAR per No 11?
* Nave Island - in per No 6
* Eilean Trodday estimated from OS at 42, but RL has this at 38 ha, so it drops out of the 40 ha + rankings.
* Lingeigh, North Uist is in at 42 ha
* Rabbit Islands - two at <40 ha per No 8
* Eilean Meadhonich is in but needs a note on the main table
* Eilean Mhic Chrion should drop to 40 ha per RL
* Eileanan Chearabhaigh - I think that we can accept that this is an island of 49 ha at some stages of the tide per No. 6 although it is a real oddity. Listed at 32 ha per OS -  can't be 49 ha per #6.
* Ceallasaigh Beag - should be in at 55 ha, possibly with explanatory note.
* Calbha Beag is in unless we can exclude per 11.
* Uyea Northmavine is in although RL has only 28 ha.
* Flodday, North Uist (Loch Maddy) is estimated by RL at 50 ha  and is in.
* Eilean Dubh Mor problem (below)
* Innis Mhòr is in the <40 ha list. Can't find a photo of it. IN per No 5
* Inchkeith - presumably RL thinks its less than 15 ha, but it can stay in the smaller list.
* Fuidheigh Beag east of Benbecula - needs an OS estimate for smaller table.
* Orasaigh - ditto, ditto. 
Freshwater islands not mentioned by RL: 
* Eilean Mòr, Loch Langavat 
* Rainish Eilean Mòr
* Moncreiffe
* Dunglass
The last two are river islands and RL may not have considered them - you can't sail round them after all. The Outer Hebridean lochs are hard going and its easy to miss something. I can't see any reason to exclude them.
Add to unranked 'complex islands' minitable (and main list of islands) 
* Crowlin Islands
* Cliasaigh Mor
* Maithidh Glas/Maithidh Riabhach
* Maragaidh Beag/Maragaidh Mòr
* Rabbit Islands?
* Eileanan Chearabhaigh
Subjective comment. Haswell-Smith gives the impression of having anchored at every location and spent some time with his measurements. Livinsgtone's tables are very helpful but I get the impression the method of measuring is less consistent. Perhaps a 'sail-by' estimate that depended on the state of the tide at the time? This might explain e.g. Gluss Isle, which he may have passed by during a high spring tide. Ben MacDui 12:00, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Specific ranking issues

message: I have had a look at this and most of the above issues dissolve if the logic is:
:a) definition of an island
:b) individual islands areas are resolved on a case-by-case basis using the most reliable sources available.
:c) ranks are per Livingstone's tables, modified as needed by (b)
This is far less clumsy and avoids:
* the need for complex modification of H-Smiths rankings  - I've put Livingstone into a s/sheet and the first 34 in rank are all exactly as our existing ranks and most of the remainder are fairly trivial differences.
* the arbitrary cut off of 40 ha. We can still assign ranks to there and no further if we wish but there is no need to stop there and thus we don't have to worry so much about whether or not Nave Island is or isn't ranked.
* some if not all of the OR issues.
I'll come up with a short list of non-trivial differences from Livingstone's list and a revised list to sort out asap. Ben MacDui 18:52, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If there is doubt as to whether or not the object is an island, the Ordnance Survey is the principal reference for determining the extent of high tides. 
Protocol for area measurement
# Articles use the best reliable source available on a case-by-case basis. 
# For larger islands this is often Haswell-Smith (2004) and ideally this source is used for consistency.
# For inhabited islands the next best reference is often General Register Office for Scotland (November 2003) Scotland's Census 2001 table.
# Other useful sources are the ‘’Gazetteer of Scotland’’, which has academic credentials, and Rick Livingstone’s comprehensive tables.
# Occasionally another estimate from a credible external source may trump the others.
# From Ordnance Survey maps map be used in the absence of other sources or if it is clear that a source includes an error.
Protocol for ranking
# Ranking is based primarily on Rick Livingstone’s tables, but may be adjusted for amendments to measurements agreed above.
# 'Complex islands': an island may only appear on the list once and usually the smaller islands that appear at higher stages of the tide are used for ranking purposes.
===Comments on RL's tables===
* Ulva (35) is estimated by HS at 1990 cf 19km2 by RL (the latter does not go for lots of decimal places for larger islands)
* Eilean Shona (72) is estimated by HS at 525 cf 6km2 by RL
* Danna (83) is estimated by Gaz at 315 cf 2.5km2 by RL
* An implication of the above definition is that Lunga, Firth of Lorn's area does not include its high tide outliers. However the difference between H- Smith for the whole (254) and RL for the part (250) is not great and it only changes the ranking by 1.
* Isle Ristol (103) is estimated by Gaz at 225 cf 1.5km2 by RL
* Longa/Horrisdale RL error referred to above.
* Papa Stronsay (72) is estimated by HS at 74 cf 54 by RL
RL has a total of 347 islands. 
* Losing St Ninian’s Isle, Fora Ness, En an Tighe Shiants & Gluss Isle as not islands plus GB as irrelevant gives 342.
* Adding back Dunglass, Moncreiffe and Eilean Mor Lonagavat gives 345. It all adds up! Ben MacDui 08:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revised logic 

message: * Ulva (35) is estimated by HS at 1990 cf 19km2 by RL (the latter does not go for lots of decimal places for larger islands)
* Eilean Shona (72) is estimated by HS at 525 cf 6km2 by RL
* Danna (83) is estimated by Gaz at 315 cf 2.5km2 by RL
* An implication of the above definition is that Lunga, Firth of Lorn's area does not include its high tide outliers. However the difference between H- Smith for the whole (254) and RL for the part (250) is not great and it only changes the ranking by 1.
* Isle Ristol (103) is estimated by Gaz at 225 cf 1.5km2 by RL
* Longa/Horrisdale RL error referred to above.
* Papa Stronsay (72) is estimated by HS at 74 cf 54 by RL
RL has a total of 347 islands. 
* Losing St Ninian’s Isle, Fora Ness, En an Tighe Shiants & Gluss Isle as not islands plus GB as irrelevant gives 342.
* Adding back Dunglass, Moncreiffe and Eilean Mor Lonagavat gives 345. It all adds up! Ben MacDui 08:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments on RL's tables

message: There may be queries about individual islands where OS estimates differ from others but the only two missing any estimate are:
* Fuidheigh Beag east of Benbecula 
* Orasaigh, Benbecula - ditto
Plus
* GRO have Flodda at 145 ha and RL has 70. The latter may be more accurate?
* GRO have Grimsay SEB at 117 ha and RL has 68. The latter may be more accurate?
* GRO have Davaar at 54 ha and RL has 100. The former may be more accurate?
* Stromay and Eilean Mhic C seem to be better estimated from OS than RL
* I have listed Uyea Northmavine at 28 ha per RL but I think this should revert to HS at 45 ha.
* I'm havering over Stromay. Superficially it does look as if it just about fits into a one km square on the OS maps.
There are numerous other smaller discrepancies but few of any substance. Ben MacDui 08:50, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Unresolved issues