Jump to content

Talk:Flannan Isles: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
GA categorizing: fixing oldid per WP:UCGA
WPSI banner
Line 1: Line 1:
{{GA|topic=Geography|oldid=101583654}}
{{GA|topic=Geography|oldid=101583654}}
{{WPSI|class=GA|importance=high}}
==Opening remark==
==Opening remark==
I deleted an item under paragraph "Corrections" because the writer was attempting to use lines of poetry to rebut the contemporaneous documents of the Northern Lighthouse Board. GMB 26.6.06----
I deleted an item under paragraph "Corrections" because the writer was attempting to use lines of poetry to rebut the contemporaneous documents of the Northern Lighthouse Board. GMB 26.6.06----

Revision as of 12:18, 11 August 2007

WikiProject iconScottish Islands GA‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Scottish Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands in Scotland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
GAThis article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Opening remark

I deleted an item under paragraph "Corrections" because the writer was attempting to use lines of poetry to rebut the contemporaneous documents of the Northern Lighthouse Board. GMB 26.6.06----

completely unencyclopedic and ridiculous

I'm going to delete the entire mystery section of the article and write another. As is, the section actually champions, albeit implicitly, a supernatural interpretation of the event. While the occurrence is certainly spooky, most agree that the men were probably simply swept out to sea by a large wave. Havardj, 14:58 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree. --JBellis 06:55, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
All three men at the same time?? Unlikely, at best. Likewise, the notion of spirits or UFOs is not ludicrous, in and of themselves, given the sheer volume of strange events reported throughout history; what is ludicrous here is including reference to them, save only as offered explanations, without any legitimate connection shown. --Chr.K. 17:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was employed by the Northern Lighthouse Board for 10 years and did work on the Flannans Light. The explanation is perfectly reasonable given the unpredictable seas that wash over these islands. The most plausible scenario is that while two keepers had gone to the landing, and being gone for an extended time, the third went to check on them and tried to rescue a survivor and both were swept way by another large wave. He may have heard a faint call for help, hence the lack of weather proof gear and the half eaten meal. Closing the door behind him would have been a natural reaction in foul weather, no one wants to come back to a flooded kitchen. I have been on the Bell Rock lighthouse when freak waves washed green half way up the tower and on Muckle Flugga when the spray was lashing the lantern and the whole rock shook with the power of the seas. The sea took them, there is no mystery. Glenhuon 8/9/2006

I think it is reasonable that the text about the mystery should not focus on explaining it scientifically/rationally, it should focus on explaining what myths have been circling in media/folklore. Titling it as a "mystery" kind of makes it clear that it is not an explanation about what really happened, but an explanation what is populary believed to have happened.--RipperDoc 07:06, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have completed a re-write of the main body of the article the excluding the mystery section. I intend to come back later and have a go at that too as well as tweaking the rest. The protestations of my old friend Fear Liath notwithstanding I would hope to take a less senational approach than the current version re the 'mystery'. Ben MacDui (Talk) 19:12, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about the enigmatic log entries?

Just curious about the "enigmatic log entries;" do they relate to the disappearance? Or just 3 socially isolated men letting things get to them? Just wondering. ProfessorPaul 06:23, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've read quotes from the log entries in some articles, but it is not clear if these log entries were the real thing, or just something made up by the authors. I will see if I can find any usable references about the log entries.--RipperDoc 07:06, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okey, I found some log entries, but I cant seem to find the source. Let me quote parts of it:

'December 12: Gale, north by northwest. Sea lashed to fury. Stormbound. 9 p.m. Never seen such a storm. Waves very high. Tearing at lighthouse. Everything shipshape. Ducat irritable.'

Moore and the captain glanced at each other. On 12 December no storm had been reported at Lewis, 20 miles away. The reference to Ducat's temper was also unusual.

The next entry had been written the same day at midnight,

'Storm still raging. Wind steady. Stormbound. Cannot go out. Ship passing sounding foghorn. Could see lights of cabins. Ducat quiet. McArthur crying.'

Again Moore and the captain stared at each other. What extremity could have caused the veteran seaman, Donald McArthur to weep? They read on,

'December 13: Storm continued through night. Wind shifted west by north. Ducat quiet. McArthur praying.'

Yesterday McArthur had been crying, today he prayed.

'12 Noon. Grey daylight. Me, Ducat and McArthur prayed.'

I can see no reference to these mysterious entries in any of the literature quoted in the references. I suspect they are a misconception and have removed them from the curent revision. Ben MacDui (Talk) 13:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I now believe that these references to the logs are to be found in the humorously titled Evil Scotland a 2003 publication by Ron Halliday. Apparently this gentleman is the Scottish 'Spooky Mulder'. The next time I am passing the Orc's Nest bookshop I will attempt to find out if he himself refers to his sources, but I fear not. --Ben MacDui (Talk) 13:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disappeared people

Surely there's no logic in an island being in a people category. If you were to include places where people have died but their bodies never found/identified it would be a very long list - many battles esp at sea, WWII concentration camps, , gulags, Horoshima, and bombed cites such as Hamburg. --JBellis 19:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose you could argue that the islands are notable, in part, because of a mysterious disappearance. However you will hear no complaint from me. --Ben MacDui (Talk) 20:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA

Certainly meets GA criteria. Passed. Da54 14:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]