Talk:River Shannon/Archive 3

Estuary length
I don't know where the 113 km was obtained for the estuary's length. All the websites I have trolled through give its length as either 97 or 100 kms : see -

http://europeaneel.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/chapter-2-study-area.pdf, http://www.shannonestuarysifp.ie/node/2, http://www.infomar.ie/surveying/Bays/Shannonv1.php, http://www.clarecoco.ie/planning/news/minister-to-officially-launch-strategic-plan-for-shannon-estuary.html

The only mention of 113 km is a measurement from Killaloe to Loop Head : see - Shannon CFRAM

I will replace the 113 km with 97 kmJohnnyf1nn (talk) 14:13, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Your reality will not be welcome to the supporters of the Shannon as the longest river in the British Isles as it cuts the length to 350km (218 miles) and thus shorter than the River Severn. Mind you the first citation following the claim in the article that it is 360km says that it is actually 280km and the Discover Ireland citation says it's 344km. (The third is based on a 12th century map which thought it flowed all the way to the south coast of Ireland and the 4th simply repeats the claim about the longest river.) However the subject was done to death on this page in 2008 so I suppose rationality doesn't get a look in. There are some myths that people will cling to whatever. Chris55 (talk) 22:12, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Chris, the article states already a number of years that the Shannon is the longest river on the island Ireland. No need for comparison with foreign objects. The Banner talk 23:12, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Burn Bogger (talk) 09:30, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Quite right. There's no need for comparison and it's been successfully kept out of the lead, after many battles. But I was referring to the statement in the Geography section which reads "At a total length of 360.5 km (224 miles), this means it is the longest river in both Ireland and the wider British Isles". Don't worry, I'm working on an explanation of these different numbers which may help. Chris55 (talk) 15:22, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Chris, most of the lengths of the Irish rivers that appear in Wikipedia come from the Ordnance Survey's "Ireland: Rivers and their Catchment Basins", a large wall chart consisting of a map of Ireland showing all of the river basins and, beneath the map, a table of reference showing the lengths (in miles) of all of the major rivers and most of their tributaries and the areas of all the river basins. There are 237 rivers and 237 tributaries listed. Also listed are the medium to large lakes within each catchment and their lengths (not areas). This chart is a 1958 reprint of one originally printed in 1867. I obtained a copy of this chart. I've compared the chart's measurements with my own and found them to be very accurate with three major exceptions! The Bann, the Erne and the Shannon. In the chart, the lake lengths (inflow to outflow) are not included in the river's length. For example the Bann is given a measurement of 85 miles. In this link - http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Bann - the lower and upper Bann are given lengths of 40 miles each totalling 80 miles (close to the chart's length). If Lough Neagh's length (18ml) is added, the overall length of the Bann should be about 100 miles. In the case of the Shannon, a length of 160.5 miles is given with the description "Shannon 160.5 Source in the parish of Killinagh Co Cavan to the sea". The 160.5ml is the total length of the Shannon (224ml) minus the lengths of all of its lakes (around 63ml). Imagine, minus the estuary and the lakes, the Shannon is a freshwater river for only 100 miles! By the way, I found that the 224 miles (from the Shannon Pot to the sea at loop head) to be very accurate. The Erne's length should be more like 84 miles (135km) instead of the 64 miles given (and in Wikipedia). (Inland Fisheries of Europe, Issue 52) Johnnyf1nn (talk) 23:58, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Johnny for that very informative contribution. I haven't seen that wallchart (at least recently), but you'll notice I tracked down a web contribution from OSI that says the same thing about the Shannon. It doesn't say much for that institution that it is still depending on 19th century measurements, does it. I personally found that using the measurement tool on classic Google maps was a better way of checking on the reality of these claims, though of course it cannot be used in the article. What they are measuring as the tidal distance of 102km I'm not very sure. I'd go with your 97 km to Limerick: I'd guess the tidal limits run out pretty soon upstream of the exit of the old Killaloe-Limerick canal which would be around 5km. For the total length, Ruth Delaney is the more reliable as she is with most things to do with the Shannon.
 * Why would you subtract the length of the lakes? They're all part of the river aren't they? The biggest irony of naming conventions is the Corrib. An 8 mile 6 km long river with half the outflow of the Shannon and greater than the Thames? Well of course it does have at least 3 huge loughs to help. But it'd be hard to call it a single river since a central part is underground! Such are the vagaries of names. Chris55 (talk) 08:18, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Regarding your discussion of the Bann: I think that's a different case. The Upper Bann is just one of a number of rivers emptying into Lough Neagh: that article names 8 and their drainage areas aren't that different. So the fact that there are two Banns doesn't really make them one river (and I think 40m for the upper Bann includes a trip across the Lough) . In the case of the Shannon, another interpretation of 160.5 miles is that it is the distance from Shannon Pot to Limerick ("the sea" is ambiguous) - which is what about I make it, measuring the "old course" not the current navigation. Personally I think the measurement to Loop Head is curious: the only natural "end of the estuary" that I can see is where the water deepens outside the narrows past Carrigaholt into a deep water bay, roughly where the channel markers start, but that takes 14 km off the distance. And it's only my opinion! Chris55 (talk) 15:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Chris, I've also obtained the O.S.I's Generalised Rivers and Lakes shapefile data set. This contains data on every river segment in the Republic of Ireland (93,549 segments) including length, stream order etc. There is also data on every lake (12,038 lakes) including area and circumference - but not the lake's length. It is simple to get measurements of river lengths using its attribute table (I use the MapWindow GIS software, but there are many others), but again, you won't get the lengths of lakes or estuaries included - you still have to measure the lakes (input to output) and estuaries using the Google Earth measuring tool. Personally, I think that the OSI never officially measured the lengths (input to output) of our lakes! On the river Bann front, I don't mind it as long as it's stated that the 80 miles is made up of the Upper and Lower Banns (and not Lough Neagh). I know that Lough Neagh has many tributaries (in fact, the ulster Blackwater measured through L. Neagh and Upper Bann works out to be longer than the Munster Blackwater!)


 * Anyway, on another topic - Here's a link to a European Commission map of the main European rivers. It's not unlike the map of "Ireland : Rivers and their Catchment Basins" but without the reference table! - EC map - it certainly puts rivers like the Shannon, Severn and Thames into perspective compared to the bigger continental rivers! However, zooming in on Ireland, it can be seen that the Shannon basin's longest river (as guided by the legend box) is the western (Boyle river) source. This is something I've been aware of for some time and have personally verified by my own measuring but hadn't got independent verification. Also here is a link giving 290 km (180ml) as the length of river flow from the River Boyle source to Limerick. - River Habitat Survey - when added to the 97 km estuary this gives a total of 387 km (240 ml) - this, again verifies my own measurements. - 240 Miles! Johnnyf1nn (talk) 23:28, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Interesting: I spent Christmas 2008 on the Boyle River (b freezing it was too!) but didn't realise quite how long it was. Could you add that information to the Boyle article? (Btw I've cleaned up your links a bit - on talk pages it's best not to use refs or raw links.) It's quite a coincidence about the total length, but I'd be surprised if it is was in anybody's mind. There are so many arguments about the combined lengths of rivers and tributaries worldwide that I'm happy to keep them short. I don't have Windows so don't have access to your GIS software. Chris55 (talk) 12:12, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Restoring "longest river in the British Isles" sentence and citations. It's been stable for years, following debate which can be found in the archives. Cited, too, rather than relying on OR, however good faith it may be. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 17:48, 11 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Bastun, if you look at the version I proposed, you will see that there are plenty of citations. But The Banner removed them. Also have you ever looked at your favoured citations? The first said the Shannon is 280 km long rather than the cited distance of 360 km. The only thing they have in common was the stupid mantra that you are repeating again. Do we really need such unproven rubbish in Wikipedia? Chris55 (talk) 18:26, 11 September 2014 (UTC)


 * If the cited length is 360km and the cited length of the Severn is 354km, well... QED? Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:14, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I would say, as I've been saying since that entirely inconclusive argument on this page in 2008 which you referred to, that you're comparing apples and oranges. Irish authorities use one definition of where an estuary ends, and British sources use another. The Irish figure extends some 14km out into the deep water of a bay, to a headland we are now told, whereas the British figure stops where administrative authority was handed over to Bristol. However the widely accepted (in that it's printed on maps, and used for other purposes) limit of the Severn estuary is about 30km further out. So my estimates are 339km for the Shannon and 384 for the Severn. Of course that doesn't matter at all as far as the article is concerned. But when there are so many figures to choose from (many more if you start on about tributaries etc.), blanket statements are inappropriate. Chris55 (talk) 17:20, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Why on earth do you cherish this "my river is longer than yours"-thingy, Bastun? The comparison has, in my opinion, no encyclopaedic value so it can be left out without damaging the article. The Banner talk 08:40, 24 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't know, User:The Banner. Just one of my faults, I guess. But it seems I'm not alone:
 * "The Nile (Arabic: النيل‎, Eg. en-Nīl, Std. an-Nīl; Coptic: ⲫⲓⲁⲣⲱ, P(h)iaro; Ancient Egyptian: Ḥ'pī and Iteru) is a major north-flowing river in northeastern Africa, generally regarded as the longest river in the world."
 * "The Amazon River (US /ˈæməzɒn/ or UK /ˈæməzən/; Spanish and Portuguese: Amazonas) in South America is the largest river by discharge of water in the world, averaging a discharge of about 209,000 cubic meters per second (7,381,000 cu ft/s), greater than the next seven largest independent rivers combined. It is also generally regarded as the second longest river in the world..."
 * "The Mississippi ranks as the fourth longest and tenth largest river in the world."
 * And so on... Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 21:56, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * It would be different when you could say that the Shannon was the longest river in Europe, but that is clearly not the case. The Banner talk 22:03, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The Shannon and Severn lengths are mentioned in the British Isles article. That's enough for me! I wonder is there a way of ascertaining where the percentage of freshwater exceeds the percentage of sea water? That point could be the "end of estuary" point! Probably impossible to determine with tides etc.Johnnyf1nn (talk) 08:29, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Why would you mention relevant facts about subjects in one place, but not in their own article(s)? Doesn't appear to be very logical.  While I'm assuming good faith, I can't help feel that there's a touch of the "never mention that horrible 'BI' phrase in an Irish article!" going on... Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:15, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Since I was a young kid in the '60s we learned that the Shannon was the longest river in "The British Isles" and I was always very proud of the fact - so if it's left on this article I won't mind! In the Wikipedia Article Traffic Statistics site the British Isles got 165 views so far in September 2014 and the Shannon got 5,426 views! So maybe better to leave it in the article! Mind you, the Severn got 10,945 views and the Thames got 38,615! So we can put that in our pipe and smoke it!Johnnyf1nn (talk) 12:02, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Split proposal
To my opinion the article is getting confusing. So I therefore suggest to split parts of this article off to a new article: Shannon Basin. As this article is about the  river, mixing facts between river and basin is not in the best interest of the article. Giving both the river and the wider basin its own place, serves the public in the best way. The Banner talk 23:57, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I would have to agree. I've had that thought before but due to my limitations as a Wiki editor I've postponed the idea! I find the entire Shannon River basin fascinating and indeed think it worthy of a seperate article - not just a sub-section Johnnyf1nn (talk) 08:30, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It gives you also the option to move the "tributaries with its source further than the official river source" to that article. <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 09:37, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * that's true although I still think the Owenmore river should be mentioned in the Shannon River article as it's so relevant to the Shannon Pot source and gets a mention in all River Shannon books that I've read, whereas the Boyle source could be moved to the new articleJohnnyf1nn (talk) 10:05, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * That will be your decision then. What serves the public best, should be done. <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 10:13, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I think I'll leave the map of the Upper Shannon for the moment, as it shows clearly the Shannon's source above L. Allen. The only other map in the article is a very basic map of the course of the Shannon with incorrect info - Lough Boyle (should be Lough Key)Johnnyf1nn (talk) 23:02, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Other Sources
It's amazing that while other furthest sources (with measurements) can be mentioned with impunity on other rivers like the Thames, the same cannot be said for the Shannon! What's relevant for one river should be equally relevant for all rivers.Johnnyf1nn (talk) 01:51, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Perhaps because you are already years hammering on it but not coming up with rather recent sources conform WP:RS. <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 04:48, 20 June 2015 (UTC)


 * WP:RS re-directs to WikiProject Skepticism which ensures that these articles "do not put forward invalid claims as truth".

As recently as late 2014, in the Boyle River (Ireland) article, I'd given two reliable sources supporting the claim that the Boyle River catchment contains the furthest source within the River Shannon basin. Here's a link to a European Commission map of the main European rivers - http://ccm.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/ccm2mainrivers_map_100dpi.pdf. Zooming in on Ireland, it can be seen that the Shannon basin's longest river (as guided by the legend box) is the western (Boyle river) source. Also here is a link - http://www.riverhabitatsurvey.org/category/gis/ - giving 290 km (180ml) as the length of river flow from the River Boyle source to Limerick. - River Habitat Survey - when added to the Shannon's 97 km estuary this gives a total river flow of 387 km (240 ml). This merely verifies what can be seen in the Upper Shannon map. So, why the skepticism? I'm only trying to put this information into the River Shannon article the same as similar information has been put into the River Thames article!Johnnyf1nn (talk) 09:43, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Earlier I have suggested to split the article in one about the river and one about the basin. I repeat that now. <span style="font-family:'Old English Text MT',serif;color:green">The Banner <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 10:33, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * which was done - anyway I'll park this for now!Johnnyf1nn (talk) 11:23, 20 June 2015 (UTC)