Talk:Garvellachs

Gallery in Error
I commented out the gallery. All three of its pictures are mislabelled. The Grey Dogs is between Lunga and Scarba. The location is nowhere near, and is not part of, the Garvellachs, even though the three may be in the same scenic area. What you see in the two pictures is NOT the Garvellachs but is Scarba or Lunga, the camera being place on the other side of the strait.

The third picture is something of a mystery. Where is it? That is NOT the Gavellachs. These three pictures are the contributions of Richard Harvey. They do not come from the usual geograph.org.uk. The latter marks the locations of the subjects on the ordnance charts. These are good pictures, no doubt, but they are not of the Garvellachs as labelled. Somewhere in the process an error occurred.

These pictures have caused considerable confusion on WP. It took me hours to solve the puzzle. I'm doing some damage control such as commenting out the gallery. I don't know what to do with them. You decide.Botteville (talk) 10:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Mr. Harvey appears to be right on the scene and reverted the gallery with the comment that no discussion is in evidence. You're too fast for me, Harvey, I can't keep up with you. I was typing while you were reverting. I hope you are reading this by this time. I note that Harvey went on to make some corrections, which I take as a sign of good faith. I will take another look after a bit to see if he covers it. Mr. Harvey, my only concern is that the pictures of the whirlpool and the dogs not imply or state that they are connected physically to the Garvellachs. What the government does and what nature does are two different things. The article is only a stub at this point. This is not its final design, but I am not going to work on it right now. I only wanted to correct the err. I'm categorizing pictures. I trust we can come to terms on this. If you want to communicate through the comments on the changes, that is fine.Botteville (talk) 11:12, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


 * PS. If you took the 3rd picture and you say it is the Garvellachs I am willing to take your word for it although frankly I can't match the picture with any of the charts. Is it possible your pile of pictures got mixed up?Botteville (talk) 11:19, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, Actually I took all three photos, along with many others both above and below the waterline, whilst resting on a chartered dive boat after diving in those locations. The skipper of the boat told me what and where they were. Having been in the same locations several times and the skipper being based in Craobh Haven I have no inclination to Say he is wrong. :)  If you have some citable evidence to say they are elsewhere then I will be happy with that. But if not then perhaps they should stay. The second image is definitely the tidal flow at the Grey Dogs, as at that time I was video filming over the bow of the boat measuring us doing less than one knot forward against the tide, whilst the engine was putting out eight knots. I am though curious about your claim that the images are causing considerable confusion on WP, as I have seen nothing relating to any discussion about them other than your edit summary. Could you please place a link to the discussion location?  I will take a look back through my old photos and diving logs, to check the dive locations. Though they are from seven or eight years back I Believe that I still have the digitised videofilm, which may be useful should someone be able to see and identify the exact locations. Richard Harvey (talk) 17:15, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello Richard, you sound righteous and credible to me. If the skipper says that one photo is the Garvellachs then it must be. What threw me off is the mention near the bottom of the pic of the mainland port from which you probably embarked. It sort of implied that the Garvellachs were visible from that port and that the pic was taken near it, which can't be if the charts are right. But, you never actually said that they were right near each other. For the rest, well, many of the pictures, especially yours (no offense intended) do not give us a clue as to where this lovely place or feature is. So, someone like me has to try to figure it out. No, I got no definitive clues. If I did I would have changed it. Looking at the charts and at other photos on the Internet I just could not identify the location and angle of the photographer. I'm not criticising your photos, which seem to me to be really excellent. On Wikipedia, what good is a beautiful photo of a beautiful place if we have no idea what place? My suggestion is that from now on you imitate geograph and state exactly what and where the place is. For changing it, I try not to alter things without good reason, which as you surmised I don't have here, on further investigation. Now, I spent about 2 hours sorting through hundreds of pictures on WP and off trying to find out where the Grey Dogs are. There are a lot of kayaking pics, but the kayakers never say where the dogs bark. Geograph has quite a few, only a few of which have been adopted by WP. During this process I began to have two realizations. First, no one seemed to know where they are, so much so that they were guessing. Most giesses were that they are around or between the Carvellachs or that the flow is in some way Garvellachian. The only authoritative source for that is us, and among us, you. You couple the dogs and the Garvellachs and that has spread to everyone else. No one has any idea why they are the dogs. One fellow thought Lunga and Scarba were the dogs. One pic in our collection calls it a dog. I think the origin of the term is probably lost in the middle ages. My second realization is that the dogs is the flow between Scarba and Lunga. When certain of that I acted here. Well I must say I am quite envious of your boating life. I think however you should not try photographing from inside the whirlpool. What you are really asking me to do is recreate my 2-hour Internet search so you can look at what I saw. For me this is past the point of diminishing returns. I'm convinced. Let the dogs lie sleeping. I'm not doing articles right now, I'm doing picture categories as they relate to articles. I appreciate your offer to correct any errors and wrong implications. Now that I have met you I will keep an eye on your pictures for you and if I see any errors or wrong implications let you know. I'm interested in the Hebrides so I am assisting on the organization of its pics and making sure the relevant articles get links to them. I'm going through the Inner Hebrides alphabetically, cross-checking with Outer Hebrides. Uncategorized pics build up. Well I got to go now. Must of my life now is time-critical. Although I was born on the crest of a wave and rocked in the cradle of the deep frankly I don't see much of it, which is why I like pics.Botteville (talk) 19:39, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I think my Gallery list of various uploaded images, to Wikimedia, speaks for itself with regard to my credibility. You will come across more as you go through various articles. As for your suggestion regarding Geograph; I  assume you mean Geograph.org. Personally I don't go on it and have zero interest in how they do things!  I take it from your reply above that there never was any discussion on WP regarding confusion over the images, as your furst message intimated! Attempting to match a location just using a chart and photos by other people is not really a suitable way to do it. At the very least you have to assume one person is correct and the other is not; the problem of course being which it is. As for the whirlpool, what you get below the surface is considerably different to what you see on the surface; and not to be confused with the exaggerated maelstroms depicted in books and films. ;). Richard Harvey (talk) 17:37, 1 September 2015 (UTC)