Talk:St Michael's Mount

message: St Michael's Mount is categorised as a priory, castle and stately home in 
Ian Cairns 11:38, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Castle or not?

message: This article should be merged with Mont Saint Michel, and I suggest keeping the french title, not "St. Michael's Mount", as I believe that even in English it is primarily known by it's french name.  I will add a merge template to the article soon.  --shaile 00:27, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with [[Mont Saint Michel]]

message: This article mentions that remains of trees can be seen at "neap tide." However, this does not make a great deal of sense, since the adjective 'neap' refers to a higher-than-usual low tide, or a lower-than-usual high tide, a phenomenon which occurs twice monthly at the half-moons. I imagine that whoever wrote this meant to say "spring tide," which is when the low tide is extremely low, and the high tide is extremely high. Wherease a neap low tide would actually expose LESS that a regular low tide, a spring low tide would reveal a great deal more. Since I can't be 100% sure that there is not some bizarre local phenomenon whereby neap tides somehow reveal more than spring tides, I have simply changed the wording to "low tide." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.143.213.61 (talk) 23:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tides?

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as Start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Start class. BetacommandBot 03:26, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: I'm referring to this passage
:In the late 19th century the skeleton of a royalist soldier was discovered when a secret chamber was found in the castle. The soldier had apparently starved to death: a jug of stagnant water was found next to his remains.
which is unsourced.  I am watching an episode of Samantha Brown's Passport to Europe in which a St. Michael's Mount guide explains on and off camera that the body was that of an anchorite who lived in a small chamber below the chapel.  When the anchorite died (of illness or natural causes, not starvation), the chamber was sealed off and became his tomb.  I doubt that two such bodies were found, and since an official guide employed by the Trust is more likely to be closer to a legitimate source than hearsay and the chamber itself was shown on camera, I think the passage regarding the "soldier" should be removed until someone can find a quotable print source. 
[EDIT] This article at the New York Times website includes this passage
:But the church holds darker memories as well. Under the family pews on the right, a sharp narrow stone stair lurches steeply into forbidding blackness. This was once the castle's dungeon. Peering down the stairs, I shivered. While those in power walked on the sunny ledges, others languished in the cold darkness below. Our brochure cryptically noted: During the last century, a skeleton of a man over seven feet tall was found in it. I remembered the giant-size steps that led to the castle. When I was a child, I was sure every castle had its giant. But this was no Disney make-believe. I thought of a bleached, dirt-covered skeleton.
which corroborates the height of the skeleton and the location as given in Passport to Europe.  There are no other details in the NYT article.  Please note that this is not something that can be easily Googled, as 90% of the results are quoting verbatim from Wikipedia and therefore call the skeleton "that of a Royalist soldier".
71.200.140.35 (talk) 17:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The claim that a jug of stagnant water was found with the body is silly. I've changed it, pretty much using your words. While a source may be hard to find online you can actually use the TV programme you saw as a source if you can recall some of the details (ie: year, publisher etc). Nev1 (talk) 18:22, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The body in the castle

message: The lead section should be a summary of the article, including, as appropriate, a brief summary of the history of the Mount. Instead, we have here a lead section dominated by specific and selective historical detail, most of which is not even mentioned in the main History section. Many statements about the time the island formed are incompatible: submerging of the woods at about 1700 BC; sea flooding in November 1099, previously "five or six miles from the sea"; sea port in prehistoric times; "island" visited in the fourth century BC. It is fine for the article to report notable sourced records or conjectures even if contradictory, but it should present these in a structured way that acknowledges the discrepancies. At the moment it seems as if different people have been adding contradictory statements more or less randomly with no consideration of the overall effect. 81.159.110.218 (talk) 02:37, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's taken three years but I think it is looking a bit better now! Jowaninpensans (talk) 22:25, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Removing the tag. PaintedCarpet (talk) 22:42, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: "St Michael's Mount is still owned by the St Aubyn family, but visitor access is controlled by the National Trust." This is incorrect. As most people in Cornwall know, it's been owned by the Trust for over half a century. The family now lease it: although, the lease is for centuries. The Trust's own website for the island (http://www.stmichaelsmount.co.uk/the-national-trust/) says that it doesn't own the island complete. What the other portion is would be interesting to know. I'm guessing (as often happens in handovers to the Trust) that the family retained the burial ground. In any case, I will revise.Engleham (talk) 10:52, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Ownership

message: Why no mention of the Giants tale? there's a little on Jack the Giant KillerTruth regards not who is the speaker, nor in what manner it is spoken, but that the thing be true; and she does not despise the jewel which she has rescued from the mud, but adds it to her former treasures 17:08, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Jack & the Giants?

message: Have reduced this article from C class to Start class because it is badly written, the summary is far too long and the use of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle as a reference for the formation of Mount's Bay is just a misuse of that document. (Military History was already classified as Start.) This article really should be a B class or higher in the Cornwall wikiproject and I will try and improve it over the next few months, after a certain editor has finished his tinkering (hopefully). Jowaninpensans (talk) 08:56, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Classification of article

message: Have moved some of the introduction to a new section as much of it did not seem suitable for an opening paragraph. John of Worcester, for example, may be of interest but does not seem, to me, to be a reliable source for the history of St Michael's Mount. Publications such as St Michael's Mount Archaeological Works 1995-8, published by the Cornwall Archaeological Society would seem to be a better source than the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle!  Jowaninpensans (talk) 18:49, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Folklore

message: #It is written (twice) that "it was given to the Benedictine religious order of Mont Saint-Michel by Edward the Confessor in the 11th century". The article at Mont Saint Michel in Normandy and St Michael's Mount in Cornwall dispute that claim because it is based on a forged charter, or as the article says: " It is now largely accepted that the document was concocted by monks after the Norman Conquest to demonstate the authentic basis in law of their ancient rights and that since St Michael's had long been theirs the Norman conquerors were in no position to give it away."
# It is written that "castle and chapel have been the home of the St Aubyn family since approximately 1650", but the article Francis Bassett says that it happened ten years later in 1660.
אביהו (talk) 12:55, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two questions 

message: Hello! During late June, July and some of August, I'm working on a paid project sponsored by the National Trust to review and enhance coverage of NT sites. You can find the pilot edits here, as well as a statement and contact details for the National Trust. I am leaving this message when I make a first edit to a page; please do get in touch if you have any concerns. Lajmmoore (talk) 12:23, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  National Trust pilot