Talk:Helvellyn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is supported by WikiProject British and Irish hills, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the hills and mountains of Great Britain and Ireland. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

[edit] Questions

What are the glaciated features? Is there Galciated erosional features, such as crag and Till?

What do you mean by that?. There are glaciated features all around. Red Tarn is a classic cwm, corrie or cirque.

I wondered if anyone has any information on how Helvellyn was named, when and by whom?. Timst 18.39 UTC, 4 November 2006

Timst. According to Brewer’s “Britain and Ireland” (2005) the name is Old Celtic in origin. It is an amalgamation of hal=upland and melyn=yellow. Liberally translated it means “yellow moor”. I am unsure why that name might have been adopted. But, bear in mind that places may have looked different in Old Celtic times to what they look now. regards. Bob BScar23625 19:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

'Yellow' is a very common element in Celtic place names; there are lots of Scottish mountains containing the name 'Buidhe', which is the Scottish Gaelic equivalent. I've always assumed it derives from the pale yellowy-green grass that grows in many upland areas, and is certainly present in the Eastern Fells today. One thing that's apparent about Celtic toponymy is that Celtic and Anglo-Saxon colour perceptions don't always match. --Blisco 19:36, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely. Different cultures see colours very differently. "Glas" in Welsh now means blue (usually), but in older texts, including toponyms, it can mean blue, green or grey, which seems unthinkable to an English speaker. A second point is that a mountain doesn't need to have much of a colour difference to be named after a colour. No-one expects a "Carn Dearg" to be brilliant scarlet, but rather just a bit reddish. This should always be kept in mind. Helvellyn should be interpreted as "the yellowish moor or "the yellower moor" [than the others around it], and not as the bright yellow moor. --Stemonitis 13:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Chaps. I suggest a more mundane explanation. An area of upland which is not subject to sheep grazing quickly becomes covered by gorse. Gorse has bright yellow flowers, and an area densely populated by gorse looks yellow. Perhaps that is the explanation of the name?. Perhaps there were no sheep grazed on the steep slopes around Helvellyn in Celtic times and so Helvellyn was covered with bright yellow gorse?. Bob BScar23625 15:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

An attractive theory (though rather less mundane than mine, I would have thought?!), but I suspect that any hill noted for being covered in gorse would be called "moor of the gorse" rather than "yellow moor". Anyway, fascinating though all this speculation is, it's not really contributing to the quality of the article – unless anyone can find a reference in a scholarly publication on the incidence and meaning of colours in Celtic place names with specific reference to Helvellyn, that is. --Blisco 17:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Picture gallery

Blisco. Fair enough. On another matter, your attention to the picture gallery has resulted in several images with people in them being removed. While you have retained 4 landscape-only pictures which are all virtually the same. Do you have some problem with pictures having people in them?. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 17:33, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I posted photographs that I presumed would have been of interest to anyone wanting to view the Helvellyn page. They seem to have been removed for no reason at all. Fair enough. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Timst (talk • contribs) 18:54, 19 November 2006.

Timst. I may be the guilty party on that. 4 very similar images were added in early November. Perhaps it might have been better to pick the best 1 or 2?. If you want to put the deleted ones back, then that is fine by me. As an aside, there was a very striking one titled something like "Janet on Striding Edge", which I think has been removed because its author didn't give proper copyright information. Bob BScar23625 19:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Several issues here. In general I think the gallery was and is too large, especially for an article that is currently quite short. To quote from Wikipedia:Images, "Articles that use more than one image should present a variety of material near relevant text. Three uniformed portraits would be redundant for a biography of a famous general." Ideally the gallery shouldn't be there at all; it's just a holding ground for pictures that people add until there's enough text to put them near. A better solution would be to create a category or a page on Wikimedia Commons and move most of them there; then, as the article grows, photos can be sourced from there and placed at appropriate points. I was planning to do that, but most of these pictures don't currently exist on Commons and it would be a fair amount of work to upload them.

As for people, I personally think it's preferable if pictures that illustrate a geographical feature don't give too much prominence to people (which is not the same as saying people shouldn't appear at all); in broad terms, it should be primarily a photo of the landscape rather than primarily a photo of people. (Of course, if people are illustrating the text in some way – say if the article mentions a climbing route, and the photo shows someone doing the climb – then a close-up is quite appropriate.) I'd say your (Bob's) pic of the summit is perhaps not ideal in this respect, but it still illustrates the summit and so serves a useful purpose. This one, on the other hand, could be almost any fellside in Lakeland if it wasn't for the small chunk of Thirlmere in the background, and seems to be more a photo of your companion than of any notable topographic feature. These are of course my own personal opinions, and other editors may disagree.

I think the only pictures I removed were the one I've just mentioned, for the reasons given, and the one of Helvellyn from Coniston Water. In the latter case I followed much the same logic: it's primarily a picture of Coniston Water, not of Helvellyn. In fact it's not even certain which dim and distant mountain is actually Helvellyn; what is apparently the highest fell looks like Fairfield to me, with Helvellyn being the highest point of the massif to the left. (And incidentally it doesn't have any people in either!) The ones I left were all good photos that in some way have the potential to illustrate the article; even if some are redundant, I didn't think they merited outright removal just yet. But in general this article needs text more than it needs photos. --Blisco 19:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Blisco. No problem. I agree that more text is needed, but a photo gallery where people can display their "snaps" probably does no harm so long as it is at the end of the article. Perhaps a clear-out once a year might be useful?. You have explained yourself, so if you wish to revert my changes I will not object. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 19:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

According to official policy, Wikipedia articles are not "mere collections of photographs or media files with no text to go with the articles." The place for people to put their snaps is Wikimedia Commons, and to that end I've created and populated a Category:Helvellyn. Enjoy! --Blisco 21:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

This issue of removing photographs is getting ridiculous. Who is playing judge, jury and executioner? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Timst (talk • contribs).

Don't take it to heart. We must remember that this here is an encyclopaedia, and non-encyclopaedic content may end up being removed. No-one is on trial, and there is no sentence; we are people who are trying to work together to make a useful reference work. I think Blisco has acted perfectly reasonably. By all means discuss which photo best illustrates the article, but I think the current selection is probably as good as any. --Stemonitis 09:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I feel the suggestion that the article is not textually large enough to accomodate several photographs is false. What happened to "a picture speaks a thousand words"? Surely the purpose of the article is to inform. Several of the photographs that have been removed served to illustrate the magnificent natural beauty of Helvellyn and the surrounding area. No additional text was necessary. Tim Stevens 15.00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Tim. You inserted some fine images created under ideal conditions. Whenever I go to Helvellyn, the visibility is less than 10 metres. But all four of them seemed very similar. Blisco has retained the best one of them. Surely, that is sufficient?. Bob BScar23625 17:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Exactly. Tim took some excellent pictures, the best one of which (IMO) is at the bottom of the page waiting for some text to illustrate, and all of which are available here for anyone to use as they see fit. But this is an encyclopedia ("a comprehensive written compendium", my italics), not a photo gallery, and our aim is not to "illustrate the magnificent natural beauty of Helvellyn" but to describe the mountain in a neutral point of view. Illustrations should enhance the text, not act as a substitute for it. --Blisco 20:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I would disagree. Surely one of the main groups of people who view this article are those planning to climb Helvellyn. There is now no photograph showing the "classic" route via Striding Edge, Helvellyn, Swirral Edge and Catstye Cam. That is one of the reasons I posted such photographs. Not for any personal attention (the photos are available elsewhere), but to give a guide to anyone planning the ascent. The "purpose" of the article is a moot point. I understand that the article is not a photo gallery, but photographs are (to many people) more informative and enjoyable than excessive text.Tim Stevens 10:00, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to keep banging on with the same old point, but this really is an encyclopaedia. People looking for route information and pretty pictures would be better off looking elsewhere. The purpose of an article is clearly given in a variety of policy documents; we must explain why Helvellyn is notable and how. If (some of) its notability rests in a particular route of ascent, then that should of course be mentioned. I certainly think there's a place for describing Swirral Edge and its place in English hiking. What the article should not be, however, is a travel guide. --Stemonitis 10:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me that we still have a couple of pictures in the gallery which are more of people than of Helvellyn, ie 'Janet on Striding Edge' and the summit group 15th April. Would anyone object to (or support) their removal?Bobble Hat 23:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I think we should delete the summit group picture - it adds very little. However, 'Janet on Striding Edge' is an excellent photo as the person gives a clear idea of the scale of this geological feature - a picture of striding edge without a person makes it difficult to work out how wide the "edge" is. Just my opinion... Euchiasmus 06:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

The summit group picture does offer something. If anyone wants to replace it with a better image of the summit, then that is fine. I am not biased by the fact that the figures are me and my 17 year old son. The same personalities appear in the Cross Fell article. We went a bit further west than usual on the day of our vist to Helvellyn. Bob BScar23625 16:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I've added what I hope is a better shot of the summit, and incorporated the most relevant and illustrative photos into the text. (The positioning is a bit messy at the moment, on my display at least, though that could possibly be improved by rejigging the text a bit and adding some more section headers.) If anyone disagrees with my choice of photos, feel free to alter. I don't think the Janet pic does contribute much - Image:Striding Edge.jpg does just as good a job of illustrating the scale, if you look at it closely - but if it is included, it should probably be captioned "a walker on Striding Edge", since her name is irrelevant unless she's notable in her own right. --Blisco 23:27, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me. --Stemonitis 10:21, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes. And makes more sense to have pictures in relevant sections rather than a gallery. Bobble Hat 09:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Glad you like it. Thank you for providing some text to put the pictures next to! --Blisco 14:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Second or third highest?

Please see my question on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skiddaw discussion page as it is relevant to this page too. 88.109.64.130 15:05, 22 February 2007 (UTC)