Talk:Isle of Lewis/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Tidied Up a Bit

The article was in a bit of a sad state, especially when compared to other places, like Skye. So, I've decided to tart it up a bit. The existing headings have been made more appropriate and sometimes split out into more useful categories. New headings have also been added. Where my knowledge is (imho) good enough, I've tried to tweak things or add. Where I know it to be deficient, I have left basic entries which need to be smartened just a bit (eg nature or myths and legends). I have put language into a section of its own incorporating both the English-Gaelic thing and the Norse place names. I have put Religion in a separate heading also. Please feel free to fiddle with this. All my edits today are in good faith (with legitimate reasons for not logging in, but would rather not go into those). 213.86.213.196 15:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Parishes and Districts

This bit needs a monumental clean-up. Why are some bits in bold and some not? Would it be better to list the areas and then have a separate list of villages which shows the area they belong to? If no one objects, I'd be happy to attempt something like that. The current layout looks rather messy. Note, this does not question the factual accuracy (or not) of the content of this part of the article. 213.86.213.196 15:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

As this article is in English, do we really need Gaelic translations of all placenames? Surely the Gaidhlig link on the left should take care of that? 213.86.213.196 10:07, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

As no objections were raised, I combined both of these ideas and made one table showing the list of villages by location. Please feel free to add, remove, edit, fiddle etc. It clearly shows which villages are lacking articles, so maybe they should be commenced. 213.86.213.196 11:28, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Nature

While looking up nature in Lewis on the net, it looks like there is a LOT of information. While some expansion can be done within this article, perhaps it would be a good idea to set up a separate article regarding Nature in Lewis (or the Outer Hebrides in general)? Any opinions? (While keeping what's currently there, or what can be reasonably edited from that) 213.86.213.196 09:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Expansion

Several sections of this article need expanding.

• Arts
• Education (Andrewrpalmer 13:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC))
• Nature - Lizards Andrewrpalmer 21:11, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
• Transport (Can still be expanded, but no longer appropriate for list - MRM 21:36, 24 May 2007 (UTC))
• Government and Politics (Can still be expanded, but no longer appropriate for list - MRM 21:11, 24 May 2007 (UTC))
• Sports (Can still be expanded, but no longer appropriate for list - MRM 21:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC))
• Myths and Legends (Can still be expanded, but no longer appropriate for list - Expanded by user Lianachan 25 May 2007 )
• Historical Events (Can be tidied, but IMHO if it were to be expanded, a separate article would be needed - MRM 14:52, 25 May 2007 (UTC) )
• Marine Life (Can still be expanded, but no longer appropriate for list, should be redrafted - 213.86.213.196 10:54, 25 May 2007 (UTC) )
• Mamals (Can still be expanded, but no longer appropriate for list, should be redrafted - 213.86.213.196 10:54, 25 May 2007 (UTC) )
• Plant Life (Can still be expanded, but no longer appropriate for list - MRM 17:42, 26 May 2007 (UTC) )
• Industry (Can still be expanded, but no longer appropriate for list - 213.86.213.196 08:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC) )
• Religion (Can still be expanded, but no longer appropriate for list - MRM 08:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC))
• Nature - Insects (Can still be expanded, but no longer appropriate for list - MRM 07:37, 14 July 2007 (UTC))

Please feel free to add to any of these sections and, if you think they are good enough, remove the relevant requests for expansion. Please also note above when this is done for each category. Thank you. 213.86.213.196 13:48, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Noted expansions - MRM 05:48, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Added Education and Industry to the list 213.86.213.196 08:07, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

History

I think that roughly the amount we have in the article is appropriate; however, Lewis has a lot more history than that. Should we open up a new article about the history of Lewis? Or perhaps the history of the Outer Hebrides? I think it would have a lot of potential. So as not to duplicate functions here and in any new article, is there anyone out there who would feel able to either significantly expand on what is already in this article, but in a new one, or to add further events? I would be happy to create the page, set it up and link it appropriately if relevant (unless someone beats me to it), but cannot claim enough knowledge to write the article MRM 17:49, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Flag

I've checked through the various languages, and where appropriate, deleted the flag. It was present in French, Esperanto and Catalan. If you are coming here to see the discussion on the flag, as recommended, please note that the flag discussion has now been archived and is pretty much accepted as a fake. It is advisable not to use it in an encyclopaedic article unless some official proof of its existence can be found. MRM 08:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Further note: This debate has been ongoing for 12 years or so on the Flags of the World site. "Fake" is a strong word to use - those interested should see the original discussion at the archive mentioned. However I agree that this flag in particular should not be reintroduced on the Wikipedia until the Flags of the World site has a sighting or finally dismisses it. --Scotthatton 15:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Infobox

Little note for anyone reading the discussion on the UK Place infobox... As of today (3 June 07), no consensus has been reached on that discussion page; however, it appears to be heading in the direction of using the Scottish island infobox for the islands and the UK Place one for anywhere else; however, it also states that the places on the islands should use the UK Place one. As such, until (and unless) any consensus is reached, I suggest we leave the Lewis one as it is because Lewis is only part of the island, with Harris being the other part.MRM 18:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

The Place infobox has a lot of information that isn't particularly relevant, and I think the map is the worst bit, it should be shaded somehow (like the island infobox maps) rather than being the dot on Stornoway. I'll knock up a Scottish island infobox version and put it here so we can see what it looks like? Andrewrpalmer 09:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Isle of Lewis/Archive 2

Scottish Gaelic name	Leòdhas
Old Norse name	Lióðhús
Meaning of name	Gaelic: "Marshy" Old Norse: Ljóðhús = "Poet's House"
Location
OS grid reference	NB323348
Physical geography
Island group	Lewis and Harris
Area	173,633 hectares
Highest elevation	Mealasbhal 575 m
Administration
Sovereign state	United Kingdom
Country	Scotland
Council area	Na h-Eileanan Siar
Demographics
Population	18,489
Largest settlement	Stornoway
References

How's that? The population is weird, I added up all the wards on Lewis from the 2001 census site and got that: [1] Best guesses on what to trim from a complete island infobox like area/pop. ranks and map colouring includes outlying islands, further discussion welcome Andrewrpalmer 13:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

The area is tricky. Haswell-Smith lists Lewis & Harris together as 217,898 hectares, excluding Scalpay and Great Bernera. This is close to the Census figure of 217,820. Thompson (1968) uses various measures that total (by my reckoning), 224,973 hectares. The difference is significant, but as the latter provides details H-Smith does not I'd suggest going with Thompson per this edit. Its the only one I have found so far that distinguishes between Lewis and Harris. Truth vs verifiability and all that.

Your popn figure is higher than the UK infobox, but as this does not provide citations it can presumably be ignored. However the 2001 Census lists Lewis plus Harris as 19,918 so there must be an error somewhere in your estimate.

Final point - I completely agree that the UK infobox is of very little value in rural Scottish locations as it simply lists the same info over and over for each location. This map is also much better. However, you may find the proponents of UK infobox hegemony take umbrage. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 14:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

18489 is the 2001 figure for the wards on Lewis, my original one was using the 1991 figures - hence the discrepancy! Andrewrpalmer 15:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm all for the new suggestion for the infobox, but you may want to include a language entry including Gd and En to avoid a recurrence of an old edit war that the current one helped sort out. Also, all the other new edits today, top notch. :) MRM 17:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

The UK Place one isn't too bad actually, just the map is a poor representation, I've asked the UK Place folks if/how we can use something that shows the island's area more clearly: Template_talk:Infobox_UK_place#Isle_of_Lewis.2FHarris Andrewrpalmer 11:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd go for the infobox on the right, it has more in the way of relevant information. Lurker (said · done) 19:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Article rating

• I've done a little tidying in response to the article rating, but there's still plenty to do if anyone wants a go. See the to-do box above and the article rating for more info... MRM 16:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

• Also sorted reference positions in nature section and the capitalisation issue. MRM 19:30, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

• Sorted reference positions everywhere. MRM 21:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Nature

The nature section is becoming a little large; it can only take so much more expanding (particularly reptile and insect sections) before a new article is needed.MRM 21:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Racism on Lewis Article

While it may be ok to include a demographics section, user:Bigsteeve has brought his own brand of prose to the article, using both an un-signed-in account and his own account. The tone of the section is extremely racist and offensive. I would revert it again, but Wikipedia has a 3 revert rule in one day (I could use a sock-puppet like Bigsteeve, but that is also frowned upon by Wikipedia). Any demographics section would need VERY solid sources.MRM 21:02, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Current edit - "Most of the people who live on the Isle of Lewis are not from Lewis or indeed Scotland, over one third of the Islands population are from England, other large groups include Indians and Polish"

Suggested edit... - "The Isle of Lewis has a varied population; as well as Hebrideans, there are significant populations of people from mainland Scotland, England, Poland and other places." - as a separate paragraph and moved.

Unless someone from Wikipedia:WikiProject_Scottish_Islands gets there first, I will change this in the morning.MRM 21:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Having read the details of 3RR, I am allowed one more edit, so I will...MRM 21:33, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Calm down Morrismaciver, there is nothing racist about the edit: Most of the people who live on the Isle of Lewis are not from Lewis or indeed Scotland, over one third of the Islands population are from England, other large groups include Indians and Polish. BTW, "Edits you don't like" should not considered vandalism, and you're even crying racism about this edit. I'm going going to slap on a {fact} on it for the meantime.--Celtus 07:04, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

With respect, the tone of the edit is racist. A more neutral POV version has been substituted.MRM 07:07, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, point by point - adding in your edit summary that you are from the island and work for the council so know better - I am from the island too. "Most of the people who live on the Isle of Lewis are not from Lewis or indeed Scotland, over one third of the Islands population are from England, other large groups include Indians and Polish"

• "Most" - clearly wrong, most of the people are native islanders, unless you count going back 4-5 generations to find 'incomers'?
• "or indeed Scotland" - that's the bit, along with "most" that smacks of racism - it may not be your intent, but your initial inclusion of it (see edit history) in the animals section suggests that it is.
• You claim to work for the council - how would they feel that one of their employees uses their employee status to present such a view online (don't worry, I'm not going to tell them, it's a rhetorical question)?
• What is wrong with changing the tone away from the "Most" and "or indeed Scotland"? Surely the content remains, even if the undesirable undertones have gone?
• If you insist on keeping the "most", feel free, but back it up with REAL statistics.
• For the tone of your edit, the non-island Scots should be treated in the same way as other incomers.

If you can argue your way around all of that, I'll happily concede the points. But it definitely needs sourcing and being more neutral. Claiming you can keep on doing it all day is clearly against Wikipedia community spirit.MRM 07:19, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I would draw your attention to Western Isles council web site which states that in 2004/5 in the whole Outer Hebrides, only 90 people from abroad registered for National Insurance numbers; while I appreciate the numbers will be up with East European migrants, that's hardly "most". Page 89 of this Scottish Executive report (predates name change to government) says that immigration as a percentage of the population is 1.7%. MRM 09:32, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

If in doubt about BigSteeve's intentions, look at his Bebo profile.MRM 10:14, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I tried to look at it, and created an account in order to do so, but it told me I couldn't view it. Lurker (said · done) 16:52, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I looked at the link provided on his user page, and couldn't find any racist content. And his edits tend to be about dogs, not the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. You may want to not use the r-word without evidence. Lurker (said · done) 16:58, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the edit again. Whether or not the intention is racist I can't say, but I suspect it is inaccurate and the syntax was poor. I don't know Lewis so well, but I doubt that "Most of the people who live on the Isle of Lewis are not from Lewis or indeed Scotland". If there are verifiable facts to back it up, fair enough. Ben MacDui (Talk) 18:45, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Relocation Proposal

I am putting forward a proposal in the talk page of Lewis that Lewis be moved to "Isle of Lewis" and the disambig page moved to Lewis (or just no article at "Lewis"). This is because of an endless stream of people vandalising the "isle of lewis" article with messages for friends called "Lewis". If you are interested, please comment on the Lewis talk page. This will not be done unilaterally.MRM 11:36, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. Other similar pages do just as well, with just a direct to a disambiguation page... --MacRusgail 14:30, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I disagree too. Vandalism of this nature isn't all that common on this article, and I don't think we should be letting vandals dictate how we name articles. Lurker (said · done) 16:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Moving Lewis would be a major undertaking. So we need to ensure that the results are worthwhile. Perhaps we can move it somewhere sunnier. That would help tourism. We could put it off the coast of Gibraltar perhaps. -- Derek Ross | Talk 19:14, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Legend has it the Vikings tried to tow it to Scandinavia, but I'd vote for nearer Malta. ;-) MRM 20:13, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

There seems to be no appetite for this and the vandalism has reduced significantly of late, so it would appear to be no longer on the agendaMRM 07:13, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

It's worth mentioning that Stranraer seems to be a target for a lot of similar vandalism for some reason, but I can't think of anything else that goes by the name of "Stranraer". --MacRusgail (talk) 12:28, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Etymology

Just wondering where the information for the bit about Lewis being named after some Norse name for poet came from. I've never come across that before and just Googling around found only one site that this little fact, but i suspect it has just harvested info of the wikipedia article. [2]. So i suspect some circular information here. Does anyone have a real reference for the origin of the name? The Ljóðhús / Poet thing seems suspect to me anyway, Leod is thought as being the Norse name Ljótr, meaning ugly. see Clan MacLeod for reference/citation. I've seen a Gaelic origin for Lewis as well, something meaning swampy ground.. or something. I'll look for a reference.--Celtus 05:04, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Found it. Martin Martin. A Description of the Western Isles of Scotland. (1703). Online version here. Here's the relevant quote: "THE Island of Lewis is so called from Leog, which in the Irish language signifies water, lying on the surface of the ground; which is very proper to this island, because of the great number of fresh-water lakes that abound in it."--Celtus 06:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

From BBC News Online. Wind farm isle's wealth of history 2007-12-13. Quote: "The island's name is derived from "Leog" which is Irish Gaelic for water lying on the surface, possibly referring to the large numbers of inland lochs on this relatively low-lying island."--Celtus 07:06, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Link:[3] H. J. B. Birks, Barbara J. Madsen. "Flandrian Vegetational History of Little Loch Roag, Isle of Lewis, Scotland". The Journal of Ecology, Vol. 67, No. 3 (Nov., 1979), pp. 825-842. Quote: "The name Lewis derives from the Gaelic Leogach (pronounced 'Looach'), meaning boggy or marshy."--Celtus 08:24, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Haswell Smith also opines that another possibility is Eilean Leodhais i.e literally 'Leod's island' but meaning 'MacLeod's island', and that 'Leod' is from the Norse 'Ljod' meaning 'clan'. I suspect the poet business is nonsense. Ben MacDui (Talk) —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 14:06, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

An interesting page which discusses this very subject here. Lianachan (talk) 02:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Peats - relocation within article

I'm thinking that maybe "Peats" should not be on a par with "History" or "Culture" but a sub-heading of something else. I would suggest culture, but am not certain. Any views? Also, should we trim it a bit? Most of the info is likely to be in the "Peat" article.MRM 07:18, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

There's nothing in the Geography section about the underlying rock mostly being covered by peat, which there probably should be, so maybe in there? I don't think there is much duplicate information, the present section is all about peat and its uses on Lewis so should be OK. Andrewrpalmer 08:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

My suggestion is to take 'Industry' our of Geography, create a new section on 'Economy and Transport' or something similar, and add Peat to that as s sub-section. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 19:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Both of those sound reasonable, although I'd tend towards the Economy and Transport option.MRM 21:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm happy with Economy/Transport too, I hadn't really thought about the whole article's structure Andrewrpalmer 22:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Re-order/rewrite

I've had a go at rewriting some sections and reordering them, new version is in my userspace at User:Andrewrpalmer/Lewis, comments welcome. Not quite finished, still need to add some citations (found a couple of relevant books) and I'm not a fan of all the bulleted lists still there. Andrewrpalmer 16:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Seems fine to me. I'm responsible for many of those bulleted lists, and I wasn't too happy with them either ;-) But was short of time and seemed to be alone in editing at the time. MRM 17:16, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I haven't been through it in detail, but it looks OK to me too.Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 13:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Up now with the references, copyedit/fix away Andrewrpalmer 11:22, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all the hard work, it looks pretty decent so far. MRM 13:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposed move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move debate was no consensus for a move. – Axman (☏) 12:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

Lewis → Lewis, Outer Hebrides — The northern part of the largest island of the Outer Hebrides should not be the primary for this name. There are other subjects with this name — ie, surname, places, etc. — that are either more prominent or just as equally worthy. And that Lewis would be better as a disambiguation page. The same reason for Harris too, the southern part of the same island. – Axman (☏) 15:44, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

• Support, as nom. – Axman (☏) 15:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose - Yes, there are other subjects, but "Lewis" alone is the primary usage. One looking for someone with the name will either type their surname of given name. For anyone searching for "Lewis" they would either want to know where the name came from, or most likely be looking for the isle. Reginmund (talk) 15:57, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
  • That's assuming a lot. Actually the primary usage is *not* the island, but the name! I came across this article by mistake, when I was actually looking for the name (*not* the island). I was expecting the disambiguation page, but to my surprise (not a good surprise) I got this page. – Axman (☏) 16:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Actually, the primary usage is the isle and the name was just taken from it. In any regards, this is where the name comes from. I would expect it to direct to the isle and it wouldn't be a good surprise for me if it didn't. I have to agree with Ben MacDui. Moving a page for the sake of not liking it where it's located is not an excuse. Reginmund (talk) 00:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
• Strong oppose to both Harris and Lewis move. Lewis is the origin of the name. I am sorry you find Scottish islands an unpleasant surprise, but I suppose we feel the same when we look for Perth and find that it's some place in Australia! Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 18:27, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Actually Perth redirects to the disambiguation page *not* Perth in Australia, therefore being fair to both cities or anything else that uses that name. So, the same should apply here, the name is either more prominent or equally noteworthy than the "island", and therefore, "Lewis" and "Harris" should be disambiguations. (Btw it wasn't "unpleasant", just not what I expected or wanted, as a non-Scottish/British user.) – Axman (☏) 02:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Fair enough - your right about Perth of course. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 19:26, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose The reasoning for moving is not the best per Reginmund and Ben MacDui. The sole reason I'd ever want the move is to reduce vandalism, but this has fallen significantly of late and would cause more bother than good. However, I'll not campaign against the move and will happily accept it if that is the consensus. My preference is against though.MRM (talk) 20:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
  • The reason to move a page due to vandalism is a much worse reason then the one I'm proposing, because there are facilities available to counter vandalism, such as page protection, etc. – Axman (☏) 02:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose I can't think of an examples where the name would be used on its own as a surname or forename, it's not the name of a king etc. I don't think the Morse character/spin-off series is a common destination either. Andrewrpalmer (talk) 21:25, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Maybe not, but the disambiguation page would be a more common destination than either the "island" or the Morse character. Because I'm coming from the perspective of an "outsider", those looking for the name, would most likely not be looking for the island. – Axman (☏) 02:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
• Strong oppose for all of the reasons stated above. Even if a move was for some (decent) reason actually required, I would have thought Isle Of Lewis would have been a better destination title. Lianachan (talk) 00:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I though about "Isle of Lewis", but Lewis is only part of an island, so thought it would be strange to name part of an island "Isle of". If you think it's a better title then add it to the request. How can you say this move is not for a "decent" reason? – Axman (☏) 02:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Regardless of how strange you find it, Lewis and Harris are both known mainly as the Isle Of rather than just the name. The postal addresses also reflect this. For this reason, I would support a move to Isle Of Lewis, but not the move you're suggesting and certainly not for the reason you give. Lianachan (talk) 11:35, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
• Strong Support. This is so logical I don't understand why it was not suggested before. If an article is not the primary use, them if should be replaced by a dab. I'm not sure that a case can be made that this part of an island is the primary use in this case. If the only issue is the target name then still do the proposed moves to fix one problem. Then you can address the correct name for the part of the island. Vegaswikian (talk) 03:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
• Strong support. Agree with nominator and Vegaswikian that Lewis and Harris should be dab pages. Doesn't seem logical why both pages are not. --203.94.135.134 (talk) 03:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose I acknowledge the nominator's appeal to the Principle of Least Astonishment; but anyone who types in merely Lewis in looking for a person must expect to do some clicking before finding what he actually wants. Since there are distinct pages for Lewis (disambiguation) and Lewis (surname), the same reader service can be accomplished by adding Lewis (surname) to the dab header; we should do this. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 06:15, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

  • So, are you saying the Isle of Lewis is more prominent than other places or people called "Lewis" and as such be the primary for this name? This is the basis for the move, that it is not more prominent, but equally valid as those other places or people called "Lewis". – Axman (☏) 12:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
    • It certainly looks more noteworthy than anything else we would call plain Lewis, or than the American places, which we would not. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

  • This sounds like an argument to oppose the change. There are many place names that start with Lewis. A person might use any of these as a link. If someone is searching they would use a search function. So getting directed to something that is clearly not the primary use is simply wrong. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose Unnecessary dabbing; Lewis as Lewis is not particularly ambiguous, no need for dab. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 12:55, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Why? – Axman (☏) 13:58, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose. Unusually I agree with PMA. That doesn't happen very often. There's nothing ambiguous here as nothing else is called Lewis. Cf. Mayo, Kerry ... Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:03, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Actually there are many others that are called "Lewis", eg, Lewis in Colorado, Lewis County in New York, Lewis from 'The Simpsons', Lewis a robot, etc. Aren't all these just as deserving as the Isle of Lewis for primary use? – Axman (☏) 13:58, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
    • How nice to see piping in use, but Lewis, Kansas, is not Lewis, nor is Lewis County, Tennessee. Those need to be disambiguated, not from robots and islands, but because US place names are tediously repetitive. Should this page refer to a robot I never heard of (no, this is not AfD, and this is not an argument to avoid), a redirect, a one-series-so-far TV programme, an obscure piece of stonemason's kit, or an island? Or shall it be wasted - always a waste to have a dab page where we might have an article instead - on a disambiguation page? Nope: nothing else (of the least importance) is called just-Lewis. Angus McLellan (Talk) 16:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
      • And it is our (finally agreed) guidance that American placenames (with a handful of exceptions) should include the state, so they can be disambiguated from each other. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
• Comment. I hope those opposing aren't using regional biases in making their decisions. – Axman (☏) 13:58, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment Please read WP:FAITH. Lurker (said · done) 14:04, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Please, DON'T tell me about the policy of assuming good faith. It's hard to assume that when most of those opposing the move are Scottish (or has something to do with Scotland) and may have a vested interest in opposing. (I may not win any friends by saying that, but it's true.) – Axman (☏) 22:28, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
      • What vested interest could that possibly be? Perhaps you are thinking of local knowledge, which some of us undoubtedly have. To assume that makes us incapable of being objective is ignorant and offensive. There already appears to be a consensus to reject your proposal, going by the votes here. Lianachan (talk) 22:44, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
        • I'm sorry you took offence, but that is what I see has come across to me. Please note this is not a "vote", it's a consensus gathering exercise. And — I must admit — at the moment consensus does appear to be against the proposal. – Axman (☏) 23:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose "Lewis" by itself is not a person's entire name. No-one looking for Merriwether Lewis is going to type Lewis and expect to get his article. So the name thing is not a reason for moving this page. As for the other placenames, none are particularly notable compared to the island. Lurker (said · done) 14:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I have to disagree with you wrt place names, maybe for a Scot the island is more notable, but for those of us outside Scotland who don't have anything to do with the British province, it just isn't notable enough over those other places. But we are all entitled to own opinions and views. – Axman (☏) 22:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I have to disagree that there is another place more notable than the Scottish isle, regardless of where on is on the globe. Reginmund (talk) 02:32, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose - the island is the most notable place, person or thing called simply 'Lewis'. If there were other notable places or people called simply 'Lewis' I would support. Anyone who has not looking for the island can go to the dab page. And no, I don't live on the island nor in Scotland nor do I have connections with Scotland - apart from my ancestry. EJF (talk) 16:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

As someone not from the UK, I thought it was strange that I was directed to an article about an island in the British Isles that is little known to those outside the UK. Rather than being directed to a disambiguation page or at least an article about the name, be it surname or other, I was directed to this little known island.

My choice for name comes from looking through the other articles about the islands of the Outer Hebrides, which also have conflicting names with other places or things, eg, Scalpay, Outer Hebrides; Ensay, Outer Hebrides; Stornoway, Outer Hebrides (but this one has since been moved to Stornoway — without any concensus btw); etc. So I thought "Lewis, Outer Hebrides" was the best choice out of the other choices I had, which were "Lewis (island)" or "Isle of Lewis" (not strictly an island on its own — that's why I shied away from these choices), or "Lewis, Western Isles", or "Lewis, Scotland" (I didn't think this one was appropriate).

The opposing views seem very weak to me. Citing that the island is the origin of the name — which is not true, see Lewis (surname). The most searched for name would be for the island (doubtful), so I did some Google tests — conducted on 13 January 2008 — and found for disambigiation: 16,500,000 English pages for Lewis -wikipedia or 14,400,000 English pages for Lewis -wikipedia -island or 11,500,000 English pages for Lewis -wikipedia -island -name; for the name: 2,170,000 English pages for Lewis name -wikipedia -island; and for the island: 1,410,000 English pages for Lewis island -wikipedia or 726,000 English pages for Lewis island -wikipedia -name. (Now I know Google tests are not conclusive, but it has given a very good indication on the usage of the name on the Internet, which is pretty convincing it's *not* the island.) The Encyclopædia Britannica only has one article on the island , which is at Lewis and Harris^[4], and the primary usage is at Lewis^[5], a county in the US state of New York. Also, Encarta has it included in an article about the whole of the Hebrides^[6] and not a separate article for the island, and there is no primary usage for Lewis that I can find in Encarta. – Axman (☏) 05:44, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

While I believe this to be the main use of "Lewis", I am willing to be convinced otherwise. However, I am certain it is not the origin of the name which will have existed for some time. Our neighbours to the South have a habit of changing the spelling of words they don't recognise until they approximate to something they can say, so many "Lewis" would originate from the French "Louis" or even the Germanic "Ludovic" long before they decided they couldn't cope with writing/saying "Leodhas" and approximated it to "Lewis". BTW although it's not an island, it is called one. Analogy: "Lewis" is to "island" as "George W Bush" is to "democratically elected President", ie in name only.MRM (talk) 07:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Let's not bring George W. Bush into this discussion ;).

The origin of the English name "Lewis" does come from the French "Louis", which in turn comes from the German "Ludwig".

I'm not against calling the island of "Lewis" an island, I'm happy to accept "Isle of Lewis", if that's a preferred name (other than "Lewis"), which also seems to be an accepted variant of the British and Scottish Governments. My main focus is not on what the island is called, but the best use of the name "Lewis" and what its primary usage should be. Now, the main use of "Lewis" in Scotland/Britain probably is the island, but outside Scotland/Britain the main use of "Lewis" is the name (first, surname, place name, etc. — all equally valid). As the island is little know outside Scotland/Britain, I don't think it can really claim to have primary use for the name. – Axman (☏) 13:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Question. My understanding is that when a page is moved, the existing page is turned into a redirect at the old name "so that links still work." However, in this case I believe the intention is to use 'Lewis' either to redirect to the dab page or for some other purpose. In the event of a move, how then would the 400 or so pages that currently link to 'Lewis' be dealt with? Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 18:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

In this case the intention is to have "Lewis" as the disambiguation page and the island retitled to "Lewis, Outer Hebrides" (I accept this is a very unpopular title) or "Isle of Lewis" (a more preferred possible title). If a move occurs those 400 or so links on other pages can easily either be updated manually or we can ask an administrator to create a bot to automate this task. – Axman (☏) 12:08, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposed move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.