Talk:Central Lowlands
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Proposed Merger
Neither of these articles is very clear, but the problem with a merger as I see it is that although in common parlance they tend to mean roughly the same thing, in geological terms the Central Lowlands is a rift valley (also known as the Midland Valley) which lies between the Highland Boundary fault to the north and a second fault line to the south running from Stranraer towards Dunbar, (see for example Keay, J. & Keay, J. (1994) Collins Encyclopaedia of Scotland. London. HarperCollins.) and which is quite dissimilar to either the Highlands or the Southern Uplands in both landscape and geology per se.
This makes this feature rather larger than I imagine most people consider the Central Belt to be. Sadly the article itself fails to make this clear. Perhaps if it was re-phrased with this in mind that would help.Ben MacDui (Talk) 14:20, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
- These are clearly closely related territories. I'm just wondering if the two benefit from formal or even traditional definitions which would help gauge if a merge is the right or wrong step to take. I'm unsure, and would like to be persuaded! -- Jza84 ยท (talk) 14:44, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
They are similar although the Central Lowlands is geologically defined and certainly includes parts of Bute and Arran and runs as far north as Stonehaven per the enclosed map. See Geology of Scotland for more details. The Central Belt is a term from human geography that is smaller in size. My guess is that most people would think it includes the Glasgow and Edinburgh conurbations and not much else - but then neither article has citations. If you can bear with me for a few days I'll cut and paste some geological information for this article and we can take it from there. Ben MacDuiTalk/Walk 14:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- Done. Ben MacDuiTalk/Walk 10:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- If there are no further comments I'll remove the merger tags. Ben MacDuiTalk/Walk 08:33, 18 January 2008 (UTC)