Talk:Lake District

message: the link to the poem of that name takes you to a wikipedia article about the plant; that would be fine if the article was talking about the plant but it's talking about the poem
why don't I fix it? well why don't you delete some of the endless "featured" articles about computer games, Simpsons episodes and related crap
(smiley face) Mr Poechalkdust (talk) 09:31, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Daffodils 

message: I've uploaded a location map of the Lake District to Commons (shown to right). I have not created an associated  template, but this can easily be done if desired. 
If this is created, it allow enable creation a map of the Lakes similar to the one under construction at Talk:Dartmoor#Location map, and could be used in related articles (see this example). Hope people find it useful.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:58, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location map 

message: On what basis has the area been divided into the sections that appear on the map and are described in the text? Are they entirely arbitrary for this article or is there some particular basis to this division? It would be helpful to the reader to have it explained.  thanks Geopersona (talk) 20:17, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they are the divisions described in the "Wainwright" books, but perhaps a Wainwright expert can check on this and add a reference or a note to the article.  Dbfirs 21:49, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

text: Yes, I think you are correct, and therefore that map is not appropriate for the article.  The map mentioned by Geopersona above is the one in the article, based on Wainwright.  Dbfirs 21:18, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geography of the Lake District 

message: Is there a good reference for the extremely high (over 5,000 mm) average annual rainfall recorded at Sprinkling Tarn? I've looked for one but can't find any.
Meltingpot (talk) 18:05, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I've read it somewhere, possibly in the local paper, but the best I can find just now is this old article in Nature which gives a lower estimate.  Sprinkling tarn is just beyond the top of Scafell.  I think there is now a rain gauge up there, but the only record I can find is 6,527mm (257in) in 1954 from The Times.  Dbfirs 19:50, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  ... later ... I've found a couple of refs so I'll add them to the article.  Dbfirs 19:54, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

text: Yes, Styhead is not far from Sprinkling Tarn, though the Met Office admits that rainfall can vary over a fairly short distance.  It would be good to find some actual data rather than press release blogs from the archives.  Dbfirs 19:35, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a much higher figure for Styhead in 2015 - over 6 metres of rain  (pg 23). From this source, you could back calculate 1981-2010 average for this location. 2015 was the year of Storm Desmond, so clearly not typical. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 22:22, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rainfall 

message: The agriculture section talks of sheep being 'heafed'. Is this a local dialect word or else an error for the commonly used term 'hefted' which refers to the practice described?  cheers Geopersona (talk) 20:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think both terms are used, but I live in a part of Cumbria just outside the Lake District, so I don't know which is more common.  I suspect that "heafed" (pronounced heeaf'd) is the older term and is retained in local dialect.  "Heaf" (meaning "heft") has been used in Cumberland and Westmorland since at least 1852 according to the OED. Dbfirs 21:44, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heafed sheep? 

message: Whilst the examples given are doubtless a part of the Cumbrian dialect they are not local only to the Lake District as, I think, the text implies. Malham Tarn and Cross Fell immediately come to mind as just two instances of localities employing these terms which are considerably removed from the Lake District. Perhaps an expert in dialect might assist us?  This section might in any case better be titled 'Place-names' or 'Dialect terms' - depending on what we want from it of course. cheers Geopersona (talk) 18:43, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomenclature 

message: The statement that Windermere Lake Steamers are now the UK's second most popular charging tourist attraction is not referenced. Whilst it might just be true, it seems to me to be unlikely - there must surely be many venues in London for a start which greatly exceed the numbers who ride the Windermere steamers. cheers Geopersona (talk) 18:46, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: They are the most popular charging attraction in Cumbria. The steamers and launches carry over 1.35 million visitors each year.  Perhaps someone has some national figures to compare?  Dbfirs 22:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This page lists it as fifth in England. But it doesn't list places like the London Eye (which claims 3.5 million per year) and theme parks (three of which are listed here (pdf) as having more visitors per year). --David Edgar (talk) 13:55, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I'll adjust the article, avoiding an English position.  Dbfirs 20:45, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  UK's 2nd most popular charging attraction? 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Keswick Panorama - Oct 2009.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on May 16, 2011. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2011-05-16. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng  {chat} 22:04, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Keswick Panorama - Oct 2009.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon 

message: I have long thought that for such an important topic this has been a sub-standard article. I'm pleased to see that the map subdividing it has gone and perhaps now is the time to take a fresh look at a description of the place. I believe the readability of the article would also benefit from a removal of the long lists of peaks and lakes - these are adequately covered on other pages (or if not thought to be adequate, these list could easily be improved). I shall probably get around to making some changes shortly but if anyone has been meaning to do the same, then perhaps an appropriate way forward could be agreed upon?
cheers Geopersona (talk) 18:52, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I thought the map showing Wainwright-style divisions was an excellent complement to the text, but perhaps it belongs in the other article you propose?  Dbfirs 07:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Though book sales etc indicate that he's clearly been a popular writer on the Lake District, I must admit I've never really been a fan and so am not especially taken with any Wainwright-based approaches to describing the area. A description of the area would best start with an overview and then a breakdown by more traditional means - these divisions that are currently listed are I guess an invention of Wainwright's: however we're not obliged to follow his approach. I'll try to work something up to see if it can do the descriptive job better.Geopersona (talk) 18:34, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I wouldn't dismiss Wainwright's divisions entirely assomething similar to his approach makes sense but some of the boundaries he chose to use are a little quirky - a fact recognised in the current article on the Southern Fells. Also his intention in writing was to describe the fells of the Lake District and not the Lake District per se, which might equally (or more) usefully be described from a valleys point of view. cheers Geopersona (talk) 20:15, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, that's a fair comment.  We could include the Wainwright divisions in a separate article, perhaps "Fells of the Lake District".  Of course, Wainwright went further east than the National Park, including the Howgills that are about to become part of the extended Yorkshire Dales National Park (in 2016).  Dbfirs 22:10, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  An article in need of improvement? 

message: Whatever Bill Smith's merits as a person and a fellrunner, it is inappropriate to list him under 'see also', as this section would rapidly exceed the size of the article itself if every Lakeland devotee were linked to. I have therefore removed the link. cheers Geopersona (talk) 18:54, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed 2 further links from this same section: Kirkby Moor is already linked within the article and also the random link to the Peak District National Park too - why not list all the national parks if listing this one - such lists can quickly become unwieldy and irrelevant. Others too could be chopped from the list I'm sure. let's try to keep it relevant and helpful. cheers Geopersona (talk) 18:55, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also 'Bill Smith' 

message: Those who are able to supply images will be able to helpfully illustrate the new sections I've added on settlements and transport - I hope! thanks Geopersona (talk) 12:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  New images please 

message: Much more could be said about both topics and a split into two sections would be desirable. If nobody else gets around to it, I'll make a start myself at some point. Mind you it would be better if experts were to take a hand in this and supply suitable references for the material. There is still a lot of woolly stuff in this article as a whole (pun not originally intended but there we are!) cheers Geopersona (talk) 19:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have now separated these out and added 'Forestry' to the 'agriculture' section though this could itself be separated out if the relevant content is added. I've included both of these together with the tourism material in a new section titled 'economy. All this is in an attempt to introduce both more content but also more structure. Others might disagree with some of this- it can be discussed and further changed or reversed as we see fit - but for the moment I thought it best to be (at least slightly!) bold. cheers Geopersona (talk) 19:52, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd add that this site looks interesting and may be a useful source of info for anyone editing the industry section; http://www.cumbria-industries.org.uk/list.htm Geopersona (talk) 19:56, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Industry and agriculture 

message: I think this usage is almost entirely adjectival, and indeed commercial, as in "Lakeland scenery". See this talk page for examples. Rothorpe (talk) 23:49, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: How about this official usage - South Lakeland? In addition, even though it is often used adjectivally or commercially, it should be noted as a name for the area to allow people to link it with the Lake District as opposed to some other area with lakes. Dabbler (talk) 01:26, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. Hope you approve of how I've put it back in. Rothorpe (talk) 01:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good and it meets the purpose.Dabbler (talk) 01:59, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's right; I've never heard anyone say I'm off to Lakeland for the weekend. but in the phrases 'Lakeland Holidays', 'Lakeland Plastics', 'Lakeland Fells' and many others it is used in that fashion. Geopersona (talk) 05:12, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Revisiting this some years on, I think we do need to further tweak the wording. I suspect that use of the term 'Lakeland' to describe the area hardly ever happens - I've never it heard it described that way in my entire life and I've been a regular visitor over decades. We do however have to acknowledge that adjectival use it enjoys, as in 'the Lakeland Fells' and similar terms. Otherwise we risk the reader unfamiliar with the area imagining that Lakeland is a name for the area that's actually used; it isn't. I suggest 'The Lake District, also known colloquially as 'the Lakes', is a mountainous region in North West England.' 'Lakeland is the name of one or two commercial outfits, the local group of the LDWA and then there are the Lakeland Museum and Lakeland Motor Museum and books and other items which include Lakeland in their titles, generally in adjectival fashion. I might reserve introducing the term to the 'Economy' section of the article since its use falls broadly within that sphere - tourism, commerce etc. Thoughts?  Geopersona (talk) 09:11, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Lakeland" 

message: Does anyone have enough knowledge to add a section on the Park's section of coastline to the Physical Geography section? Not the part of the Park one instantly pictures, but it struck me as an obvious omission? Grunners (talk) 09:54, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The National Park has only a small section of coastline, but the "Lake District" can include the remainder of the coast including the "Lakeland Peninsulas".  I agree that it would be good to add such a paragraph.  Any offers?  Dbfirs 12:15, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a couple of paras relating to the NP's extending to the sea in the west and at points in the south - the (largely undefined?) traditional Lake District may or may not do so! cheers Geopersona (talk) 09:42, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

text: I've added a mention of the peninsulas, though they are only sometimes regarded as part of the Lake District.  Dbfirs 04:10, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I integrated them into the existing section, shifting its overall focus from the park to the region, in keeping with the scope of the article. Largoplazo (talk) 11:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coastline 

message: Not too long ago I added Coniferous forest, deciduous forest, lake and moorland as biomes in the infobox. I am starting to think whether they should be more specific or biomes should be only added if they are confined to the park. Sl3nderman3006 (talk) 00:09, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biomes 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Lake District. 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/20110111003247/http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/about_us/news/2009/111209.aspx to http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/about_us/news/2009/111209.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120518032837/http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/conservation/designatedareas/new/northwestdesignationproject/default.aspx to http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/conservation/designatedareas/new/northwestdesignationproject/default.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120825080327/http://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/site-information/search.aspx?terms=lake+district+peninsulas&cf=keywords to http://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/site-information/search.aspx?terms=lake+district+peninsulas&cf=keywords
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/visiting/thingstodo/green_roads
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cumbria-industries.org.uk/a-z-of-industries/roads/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/visiting/thingstodo/green_roads
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cumbria.gov.uk/roads-transport/public-transport-road-safety/countryside-access/hotr/hierarchy_of_trails_routes.asp
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/visiting/thingstodo/green_roads/green_road_gatescarth
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gleam-uk.org/contentious-issues/walna-scar-road-restricted-byway-order-renewed/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:56, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In this edit the cite is mangled and a working archive page doesn't support the given cite. -- GreenC 16:06, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've replaced the mangled ref with a correct one; same author and date and quote. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:21, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed cite 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Lake District. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/site-information/search.aspx?terms=lake%20district%20peninsulas&cf=keywords
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/552950/1.2-RoW-FAQs.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cumbria-industries.org.uk/a-z-of-industries/roads/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/visiting/thingstodo/green_roads
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cumbria.gov.uk/roads-transport/public-transport-road-safety/countryside-access/hotr/hierarchy_of_trails_routes.asp
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/visiting/thingstodo/green_roads/green_road_gatescarth
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gleam-uk.org/contentious-issues/walna-scar-road-restricted-byway-order-renewed/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110605003213/http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/nw/ to http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/nw/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:17, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This is out of date now that the Lake District and Yorkshire Dales national parks extended in 2016 so that they now about each other at the M6 motorway. Could someone who know s how to do these tings modify or replace it with something modern?  I expect it will be used in other articles too. cheers Geopersona (talk) 09:45, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map of English & Welsh national parks 

message: I've WP:BOLDly split the section about the national park off into its own article. My rationale is that the Lake District was known as such long before the designation of the park in 1951, and most of the information in this article is about the Lake District, not specifically about the park. In addition, the article contained an infobox that was really specific to the park. Finally, as the content notes, the park isn't coterminous with the district.
Some content in this article outside of the original section about the park references the park. In each of these cases, I or someone else needs to see whether
* the information really pertains to the district, irrespective of its designation as a park (which will include any information that was true before its 1951 designation), in which case "park" or "national park" needs to be removed or replaced with "district"; or
* the information is specific to the park, in which case, depending on whether it's a phrase, a sentence, or an entire section, the information should be transferred to the park article.
Largoplazo (talk) 11:42, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Largoplazo (talk), I wondered why there was two seperate articles for the Lake District National Park +  Lake District, now you've explained I totally agree with the rationale behind this. --Devokewater (talk) 10:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  National Park split 

message: The article currently says (under Gastronomy):"The region has four Michelin Star restaurants: L'Enclume, The Samling in Ambleside, The Forest Side and Gilpin Hotel."
L'Enclume is situated outside the National Park (and therefore outside the World Heritage Site) in Cartmel. Noting that the article struggles to reach a definition of what is meant by "the Lake District", I question whether or not this Michelin starred restaurant should be in the list. If the consensus goes against me and the article includes this restaurant, the reference should be 
The Samling Hotel is listed in the Michelin Guide, but has lost its Michelin star. 
Missing from the article are the following, all new for the 2020 list:
The Cottage in the Wood (Braithwaite, CA12 5TW)
Allium at Askham Hall (CA10 2PF)
Old Stamp House (Ambleside)
The Forest Side and the Gilpin Hotel (or more correctly, Hrishi - this hotel has 2 restaurants, the other is only Michelin listed, not starred) both continue to be Michelin starred. Counting that all up, that makes 5 restaurants with a Michelin star in the Lake District - or 6 if people insist that Cartmel is in the Lake District (which I really think it is not). It might be a better alternative, if L'Enclume is to be mentioned, to say that the 2-starred L'Enclume is just outside the park's boundary in Cartmel.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 19:42, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Geographically, L'Enclume is just outside the Lake District, only by a couple of miles, however it's so close + due to it's reputation it should be included in the list however noting its location being "just outside". Regards  --Devokewater (talk) 10:19, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This was dealt with last year  - I should have put a note on the talk page to that effect.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 10:33, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Michelin starred restaurants 

message: I've just been BOLD and merged 'Lake District National Park' back into this article. The former article wasn't very long, so most of its content could easily be incorporated into a subsection here, with some going into other subsections and a little removed as duplication. 
When a national park covers a pre-existing region I find it's often possible to include information on the park (e.g. its administration and purpose) as a subsection of the region's article, rather than it needing its own page. You can see this at Snowdonia, Exmoor, and New Forest, for example. From what I can gather park-specific references were never fully removed from this article after the 2019 split, and I'd suggest that's in part because the region and national park cover nearly identical areas and so it's easier to discuss them together. So long as we're careful about language where the boundaries of the national park and pre-existing region differ I think we'll be fine. 
[pinging @Devokewater, @Largoplazo] A.D.Hope (talk) 13:07, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  National Park merge