This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Loch Achnacloich is within the scope of WikiProject Lakes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of lake-related articles on Wikipedia, using the tools on the project page. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LakesWikipedia:WikiProject LakesTemplate:WikiProject LakesLakes articles
I came across this article while checking every loch article was linked to the right Wikimedia Commons category. Unfortunately, the article seems to have mixed up two locations: a small loch on the east coast of Scotland near Dingwall (the GPS coordinates, and the JNCC) and Loch Etive on the west coast of Scotland, which has a small settlement named Achnacloich on its southern shore, which is what the photo was of. (I have no idea where "Dergoals Burn" came from: it's not on the OS map. Googling it finds one in Dumfries and Galloway.) My thanks to Bjh21, whose categorisation of the image alerted me to this problem. Blythwood (talk) 15:33, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I created it and I will check it. Thanks. scope_creepTalk 16:53, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I seems your were right. I never knew there was two of these villages. Thanks. scope_creepTalk 17:02, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
scope creep, great, thanks. I've now checked out where "Dergoals Burn" came from–it also appears in the article for Barhapple Loch (where it's correct), and Loch Tummel, where it was wrong and I've also now removed it. Perhaps you copied the infobox into both articles from the Barhapple Loch article without stripping out all the parameters? I don't have time to check the other infobox parameters for similar glitches, so might be worth doing that. Some of the parameters in this infobox didn't match the British Lakes page, so I've removed them. (Adding to my confusion, there's a misprint on Bing's small-scale Ordnance Survey map that has Barhapple as Barnapple, but the large-scale one has it right. I think!) Blythwood (talk) 13:27, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Blythwood: I plan to check a good number of them and as they are not as correct as I thought. The British Lake site is now gone. It is has been subsumed into Centre for Ecology and Hydrology. For the Pond of Drummond @ [1] Blythwood are you up for taking a review at this latest one I did Pond of Drummond. It is not finished yet, it has a feature, but I like to know would if they are all crap. Thanks. scope_creepTalk 13:41, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Ehrenkater: Can you please don't put the length of loch in article. It adds a sentence to about 800 other loch can easily put the infobox a length and breadth property. I've standardised on using the infobox for physical properties. The information comes from the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology re:above. Thanks.scope_creepTalk 13:47, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Adds a sentence? It adds about five words of useful information. It's not as if it's an overlong article! Where do the other 799 lochs come in??---Ehrenkater (talk) 13:59, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Its the rest of the lochs I'm doing. Its a lot of them. It's ok. I'll do it myself. scope_creepTalk 14:29, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Scope creep:–I don't have time to check other articles right now, sorry, and my knowledge of Scottish geography is limited. I replaced the British Lakes web link with an archive link (probably not the best way of doing it, but it links now). Blythwood (talk) 23:24, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
