Talk:Land's End to John o' Groats
|WikiProject UK geography||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Hiking trails||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
The Lady of Kenmure
This seems rather too off-topic. I've never heard of the expression John o' Groats to Maidenkirk but if it is really used other than as a quote from Burns poem then it would be better in its own article. Also the expression Land's End to John o' Groats is usually refering to the journey between the two points rather than being an alternative to saying across the whole country which would apprear to be what Burns was taking about.--JBellis 20:13, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've come across it elsewhere, but it is archaic. Maybe this should be at Maidenkirk. --MacRusgail (talk) 14:34, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Interesting idea though, parallel extreme journeys. I've started a category for them, but I'm not sure if the idea will work. A German friend says there is no such route, or even concept there. I am intrigued PeterGrecian (talk) 12:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
User:Deiz has deleted external links which I thought useful and relevant and he did not. One link was added by 22.214.171.124 on 14 Feb 2006, and was to a list of links to LEJOG reports by cyclists. The other, added by myself on 14 Dec 2007 (I think my very first WP edit!) was to a list of links to LEJOG reports by walkers, which is on a non-commercial website of mine. I now realise that under WP:EL I should not have linked to my own website, but mentioned it here instead. I know from my site statistics that at least 2 or 3 people a day have clicked through from this article to the list of walkers' sites, so others have found it a useful and relevant link.
The reason for including these links is to point to material with further reading which is likely to be helpful or informative - and to avoid the plethora of "me-too" links to personal sites of those who have completed the journey (as has happened in the past on this page).
The sites can be accessed indirectly from the www.longwalks.org.uk site (the link to which I also added in my edit of 14 Dec 2007 - and is not connected to me in any way).
Deiz does not say why he thought the links conflict with policy WP:EL, but I assume that in my case he felt there was a perceived conflict of interest. In which case I will leave it to others to comment or edit further!
- WP:COI and WP:EL are relevant - only sites regarded as reliable, comprehensive and ideally encyclopedic in their own right should be linked. I wasn't getting that with the removed links. However, if there are clear arguments for inclusion made before re-adding, and a commitment to keep the list managed in future, I'll defer to Mhockey's judgement in the short term. Deiz talk 02:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)