Talk:List of rock formations in the United Kingdom

Scope
This list is potentially endless and 'woolly'; even now is very variable as regards what has been included. It could end up simply being a list of all landscape features in the UK, at least those that have some element of hard rock within them. What exactly constitutes a 'rock formation'? cheers Geopersona (talk) 06:31, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * See new lead paragraph. --Bejnar (talk) 18:22, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * A useful addition. Geopersona (talk) 20:27, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Beaches
I do not see how beaches can qualify for this list. Headlands I can understand. White Rocks Beach (County Antrim) shouldn't qualify, but White Rocks Arch would if it were notable (i.e. had significant coverage in reliable sources). The lead does require notability, does it not? I doubt if White Rocks Arch is notable, there is no mention of it in the Bushmills article. --Bejnar (talk) 18:22, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd agree! Geopersona (talk) 20:27, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Me too... Beaches are not under rock scope... -- WhiteWriterspeaks 16:20, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

rock formations aesthetic vs. formations geologic
I considered deleting the entry under Northern Ireland for Waterloo Bay, Larne, because there was no mention of it in the Larne article. However, the outcrops there of rocks from near the end of the Triassic Period are quite well-known as fossil beds, and the sequence goes into the beginning of the Jurassic Period. See, e.g., "Waterloo Bay, Larne - Northern Ireland’s Jurassic Park". The real question is then the meaning of "rock formations" appropriate for this list. From the lead (lede), I understood it to be rock formations aesthetic, under which rubric the beds at Waterloo Bay would not be included. --Bejnar (talk) 22:33, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposal
I suggest that the list be limited to those rock formations with existing Wikipedia articles, and to those which have significant discussion in existing Wikipedia articles, the latter can have piped links. This might address some of Geopersona's concern, and will tend to ensure notability. We'd accomplish this by placing a consensus notice here on the talk page (when/if achieved), see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Stand-alone lists. --Bejnar (talk) 18:22, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Support Naturenet | Talk 21:44, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Support also. -- WhiteWriterspeaks 16:21, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Support: do it! — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 10:25, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Scope consensus
This article is limited to listing those rock formations with either (1) existing Wikipedia articles, or (2) with significant discussion in existing Wikipedia articles. Rock formations which do not have their own article, should have piped links to the specific place in another Wikipedia article where they are discussed. Please note that formations of geologic interest should not be included, unless they also meet the criteria of isolated, scenic, or spectacular surface rock outcrops as stated in the lead paragraph in accordance with Lists_(stand-alone_lists). See also Lists_(stand-alone_lists). If you wish to add a rock formation which meets the scenic criteria, but does not meet the notability-based criteria above, then first please add the appropriate information to the geographical article that deals with the area where the rock formation is found. --Bejnar (talk) 08:24, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

White Rocks Beach, Bushmills, County Antrim
Two rock formations on or near the White Rocks Beach of Bushmills in Northern Ireland are indeed isolated, scenic, or spectacular surface rock outcrops. First is a large white arch with a span of 17 feet and height of about 40 feet, known as White Rock Arch. Second is the less spectacular Bushmills Arch at the east end of White Rocks Bay with a 15 foot span and a ~50 foot height. However, neither the Bushmills article nor the County Antrim article mention either of thse formations, nor even mention White Rocks Bay. If either of these is notable, then the appropriate geographical article should not only mention them, but provide adequate discussion of them. --Bejnar (talk) 08:24, 21 March 2012 (UTC)