Talk:Geology of Great Britain

message: Assuming it is the same anon behind all those edits, good work... I'm impressed with the work you've done on this page... though all those red links must look tempting for you to fill in.. :) Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 08:07, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Thanks

message: I propose that this article be moved to Geology of the British Isles, a more natural title given its content, or be cropped and moved to Geology of Britain, which currently redirects to here.
Lapsed Pacifist 02:59, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed move

message: Is there a chance someone from here could take a quick look at British Isles#Geology and make sure it is an appropriate summary? EricR 16:54, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Summary

message: Just popped in looking for any information about the Slyne-Erris Trough, since I'm going to be working there next month. Clearly a lot of work to be done. The major point that springs out from the page as it stands is that it refers to the "British Isles", but seems to ignore the western of the islands, Eire.
I'll have a look around and see if I can come up with a list of structural elements, an appropriate map, and so on.
A Karley 06:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: more work to be done

message: Although the title and article infer the British Isles, the only picture in the article is that of Great Britain and outlying islands. I think it would add more to the article if a larger image was used - one inclusive of both Ireland/Northern Ireland and Shetland, if at all possible. Mouse Nightshirt 18:13, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture? 

message: Hi, Could any experts in UK geology help me with the Mendip Hills article. It is currently an FA candidate & another editor has queried the accuracy of the geology section. The article says :
"The Mendip Hills are the most southerly Carboniferous Limestone Upland in Britain and are comprised of three major anticlinal structures, each with a core of older Devonian sandstone and Silurian volcanic rocks. The latter are quarried for use in road construction and as a concrete aggregate. 
200 million years ago the Mendips were considerably higher and steeper than they are today.  Since then weathering has resulted in a range of surface features, including gorges, dry valleys, screes and swallets. These are complemented underground by a large number of caves, including Wookey Hole, both beneath the plateau and at the base of the southern escarpment. There are also limestone pavements, karst and a number of gorges, most famously Cheddar Gorge and Burrington Combe. Springs, a number of which deposit tufa, are a particular feature of the eastern part of the hills."
& the challenge is:
"Geology If it's Carboniferous Limestone, there's something wrong—or insufficiently explained—about the reference to "200 million years ago" (which is roughly Triassic/Jurassic). You'd better check this. It's not necessarily wrong, but the Carboniferous was roughly 360-300 Mya. US geological usage divides the Carboniferous into Mississipian & Pennsylvanian: I suggest you make it clear in which period the Mendips were formed "
Does anyone have the expertise to edit/ correct/ explain the article? Any help appreciated.— Rod talk 19:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For the hills to be 'higher and steeper 200 million years ago' they must have existed (as land) then, i.e. they must (now) consist of rock more than 200 million years old. Unfortunately someone seems to have muddied the water since the above comments by altering '200' to '200 to 300'. For the hills to consist of Carb. limestone they must clearly have been under water in Carboniferous times. Pterre (talk) 11:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help with ages of rocks of the Mendip Hills 

message: Hi, while this page calls itself the "Geology of the British Isles", it's actually a Geology of Britain. There are only a few references at all to Ireland and these are obviously put in as late additions that don't affect the overall content.  Unless there's a reason not to, this page should be renamed "Geology of Great Britain".  81.32.183.150 08:03, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This page is redirected from "Geology of the UK" and from "Geology of Britain".  The page's contents obviously refer to the island of Great Britain and really to nothing else. This page shouldn't be called "Geology of the British Isles".  I'll put in a request to move on Friday, unless there's objection here.  Hughsheehy 12:12, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it might be more constructive to concentrate efforts on improving the coverage of Irish geology within the article, rather than in name changes.  While Irish geology coverage in the article is certainly inadequate, to solve that problem by deleting it altogether is hardly an improvement.--86.31.232.172 22:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This page has apparently been misnamed for several years and no editors capable or willing to improve the coverage of Irish Geology have appeared in all that time.  It's time to rename.  83.39.134.72 10:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renaming this page 

message: Since this is an article about the British Isles it would be appropriate to use British English. I'm thinking in particular about Palaeogene, Palaeocene (with separate letters, not the æ thingumywhatsit), as used on current BGS maps for example . I was also brought up on Palaeomagnetic, Palaeozoic, Caenozoic, Palaeontology, etc. Any dissent? Pterre (talk) 11:18, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It occurs to me interested parties might not bother to look at this from their watch list as I followed it soon after with another edit elsewhere on the page. So I'm editing it again. Last chance to object! Pterre (talk) 16:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  British spelling 

message: As far as I can see, the article refers only to Great Britain, and the previous discussion on a rename/move had gone nowhere but never been opposed.  Let me know if there's discussion.  Wotapalaver (talk) 13:36, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename

message: Does anyone know the history leading up to the deletion of the geological map formerly illustrating this article? It seemed to be a scan of an old map that should be well out of copyright, and we have a number of maps derived from it still in use.   Pterre (talk) 21:02, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted map 

message: I was interested to note what the geology was where I lived. However the map used to illustrate this page is wonderfully colourful but has no indents to say what the different rocks types are making pretty but pointless as a reference aid.
I make my point based on being a layman and with no formal knowledge of geology.
It needs fixing with a legend.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.174.136.253 (talk) 15:16, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have the same problem - beautiful colours but what do they refer to? Richerman (talk) 11:03, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is the map legend? 

message: Map At Top is Useless Without A Key  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.50.171.227 (talk) 15:15, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That's corrrect, the color legend is missing. --89.247.203.163 (talk) 09:18, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In answer to the various calls for a key to be supplied for the map, I have attempted that by way of captioning, not having the ability to provide a colour key. Doubtless someone can improve on my descriptions of the colours though there's a difficulty with some of the colours being very similar and there being what appear to be errors, at least to my eye: the Permo-triassic sedimentary rocks of the Vale of Eden for example are similar in colour to volcanics of other ages and the Devonian of Scotland is a different colour from that of the Anglo-Welsh basin. Anyway it's a start, until a better map comes along. cheers Geopersona (talk) 05:36, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map At Top Useless Without A Key