Talk:Longships, Cornwall

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Islands

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands 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.IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject IslandsTemplate:WikiProject IslandsIslands articles

Cornwall Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cornwall, an attempt to improve and expand Wikipedia coverage of Cornwall and all things Cornish. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.CornwallWikipedia:WikiProject CornwallTemplate:WikiProject CornwallCornwall-related articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

See drop-down box for suggested article edit guidelines:

Be bold - if you know something about Cornwall then put it in! We value your contributions and don't be afraid if your spelling isn't great as there are plenty of spelling and grammar experts on clean-up duty!
Articles on settlements in Cornwall should be written using the standard set of headings approved by the UK geography WikiProject's guideline How to write about settlements.
At WikiProject Cornwall we subscribe to the policies laid down by Wikipedia - particularly civility and consensus building. We are aware that the wording on Cornish entries can sometimes be a contentious topic, especially those concerning geography. You don't have to agree with everything but there is no excuse for rudeness and these things are best solved through consensus building and compromise. For more information see WP:CornwallGuideline.
These pages are not platforms for political discussion. Issues relating to Cornish politics should be restricted to those pages that directly deal with these issues (such as Constitutional status of Cornwall, Cornish nationalism, etc) and should not overflow into other articles.
Most of all have fun editing - that's the reason we all do this, right?!

Untitled

Making false accusations of vandalism and stalking (extraordinary from such a newbie who doesn't even understand wikipedia) will not help youtr POV case. Changing the UK to England in accordance with Cornwall (where you lost your similar argument) is POV and reverting it is neither stalking nor vandalism by any stretch of the imagination, SqueakBox 15:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Following someone round Wikipedia and deleting their edits to continue an argument (which I did not lose, but simply walked away from so as to leave you to it) about a completely different article IS stalking, and it is also an intensely personal and obsessive vendetta on your part which is embarrassing you. England is NOT a sovereign state (accept it), it is a constituent part of the UK, therefore Cornwall's international state-level identity is UK. To insist otherwise is English nationalist POV. Further, as a self-professed "encyclopedia writer" and "veteran" Wikipedian you should know that using Talk pages and Wikipedia in general to pursue personal vendettas against other editors is against Wikiquette. Show good faith and uphold accuracy. Thanks. Doire 14:20, 6 January 2006 (UTC).

Please see Wikipedia:Good faith and act accvording to its strictures. Your comments are out of line. I find your stalking allegations extremely offensive and suggest you withdraw them. I clearly have not been stalking your edits, to be honest you are making so few edits it would be impossible for anyone to stalk you. I am not claiming England is a sovereign state (indeed people here in Honduras often insist for official purposes I must be from England to which I say England is not a state, it is the UK) but Cornwall states Cornwall is in England because it is in England so you have no reason to claim differently, SqueakBox 14:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will not withdraw my insistence that you are stalking me until you stop stalking me on Wikipedia (following someone round Wikipedia trying to continue an old argument from a talk page IS stalking AND a vendetta). Show good faith. If you find such an insistence "extremely offensive" then you are "extremely offended" easily, and clearly do not understand the consequences of your actions. If you don't want to be "extremely offended" by my insistence that you are stalking me then stop stalking me. Simple. You ARE claiming England is a sovereign state because internationally England is a constituent part of the UK. Any edit that uses "England" as if it is a international state-level entity is an English nationalist POV and thus not acceptable on Wikipedia. Thanks. Doire 15:12, 6 January 2006

Well this has no resolution until you withdraw your foul and offensive stalking allegations but it certainly fits in with your earlier vicious personal attacks, cl;aiming I was incapable of work because I did 2 houirs of wikipedia a day, that I was stupid etc. Stop trolling and trying to be aso9ffensive and as rude as possible, SqueakBox 15:33, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nowhere did I say that you were stupid. Please support accusations with proof of what I have said and where I have said it. Nor did I say you were incapable of work; I suggested ON ANOTHER TALK PAGE TO THIS ONE (in response to an insult from you) that if "all you did was work on Wikipedia, then you should probably consider yourself unemployed or underemployed". Please don't turn talk pages into misinformation fora for your vendetta. This is a talk page relating to the article on LONGSHIPS. If you are not going to discuss Longships or the artice on this talk page then please go somewhere else. Thanks. Doire 15:41 6 January 2006

I never insulted you. Here you are justifying your outrageous and depply offensive attacks. Debates cross over pages. Why not learn about wikipedia before lecturing people who know somewhat better how this place works than you do. Why not look at my user page, where you can read about my job, not that it is any of your business but I can see you are getting a kick out of being offensive. As I said to you before I pity you if you really think 2 hours a day is full time work. Please desist, I am certainly not willing to debater with you until you cease your personal attacks, SqueakBox 15:50, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is the LONGSHIPS talk page. Use it to discuss Longships and the article or leave it alone. As you describe yourself (persistently) as a Wikipedia veteran you should know that. If you are "deeply offended" and "extremely offended", and consider that I am "getting a kick" out of you stalking me, all you have to do is stop stalking me and my edits. (I wish you would.) You say you are not willing to debate with me - I wish you would stay true to this statement and leave me alone. Thanks. Doire, 15:53, 6 January 2006. (UTC)

Merging the article

During a recent discussion following which the Wolf Rock, Cornwall article was merged with the Wolf Rock Lighthouse article it was suggested that the same treatment should be given to this and the Longships Lighthouse article. I'm happy to do this but will give a little time in case anyone has any objections to this. If not, I will proceed without further formality. Chris55 (talk) 17:24, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is a bit more content here, namely about the names of the individual rocks, I therefore suggest that they should remain separate. Wolf Rock on the other hand is just a single rock. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:18, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Longships. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:20, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 April 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Page moved. Consensus for Longships, Cornwall as the primary was the most evident. I did create a redirect for the secondary option as well. (closed by non-admin page mover) -- Dane ^talk 22:49, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Longships → Longships, Cornwall – I think the primary topic for the plural is the same as the singular form, that is, the Viking longship, located at longship, and that "longships" should redirect to "longship". That is also what Google results indicate. -- 70.51.201.106 (talk) 14:49, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Or Longships (rocks). Absolutely. Clear primary topic for the plural as well as the singular. And I'm Cornish! -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:11, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per plural of a primary topic. -- Netoholic @ 16:33, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support Longships (rocks). Clear what is being dealt with Monstrelet (talk) 16:37, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Longships (Cornwall). Standard practice is to disambiguate by location and use parenthesis for natural features. PC78 (talk) 17:03, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Per WP:PLACEDAB: "With natural features, the tag normally appears in parentheses, as in Eagle River (Colorado). Specific pre-existing national conventions may take precedence though." Longships is an uninhabited island, not a settlement. AFAIK there isn't a UK-specific convention that would override this. PC78 (talk) 00:47, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - And with UK rivers we have River Stour, Suffolk (per WP:NCRIVER) and Wolf Rock, Cornwall (although now a redirect). WP:UKPLACE gives Jura, Scotland as an example in Scotland and it doesn't seem logical to have different NC for settlements and buildings to landforms. However I'd actually maybe favour something like Longships (rocks) or Longships (archipelago) per my comment below about the ships also being in Cornwall. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:31, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - It's not a river (and that NC isn't specific to the UK), the redirect doesn't really count, nor (at the expense of sounding a little pedantic) is it in Scotland. We do on the other hand have Deadman's Island (Kent), Long Island (Dorset), Spike Island (Cheshire), St Mary's Island (Tyne and Wear), etc., though I accept that both forms tend to be used so there are many counter examples as well. But unless there's a specific guideline for UK natural features I don't see any good reason to deviate from the general NC. PC78 (talk) 20:55, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      - All of those in Category:Islands of the Isles of Scilly use commas and not brackets. Commas usually denotes "is in" and brackets denote "is a". However if we use "rocks" or "archipelago" that would be moot. Crouch, Swale (talk) 13:52, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:ASTONISH and use Longships, Cornwall per WP:UKPLACE as it doesn't matter if its a settlement or natural feature its still located in Cornwall, similar to Wolf Rock, Cornwall. I had wondered about this one but noticed that the Commons category for the ship just uses the singular so I didn't for that reason but it indeed looks like the plural is still common and even a Google search for England (and considering I look for topics like the place in Cornwall) still returns that are dominated by the ship, not place. It doesn't look like there are many incorrect links but that isn't sufficient to keep the place at the base name. Either redirect Longships to Longship or to Longship (disambiguation), if the former is done a standard {{redirect}} hatnote can be used. There surely most have been longships in Cornwall to so I'd also support Longships (rocks) per Necrothesp and Talk:Metro (city)#Requested move 17 November 2018. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:44, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. "Longships" is the more ambiguous of these terms. "Longships (rocks)" is, in my opinion, even better than "Longships, Cornwall". --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 20:43, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.