Talk:Flannan Isles

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Scottish Islands High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scottish Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands in Scotland 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.Scottish IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject Scottish IslandsTemplate:WikiProject Scottish IslandsScottish Islands articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. UK geography Mid‑importance This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

	Flannan Isles has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 18, 2007 Good article nominee Listed October 9, 2008 Good article reassessment Kept
	Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 26, 2011, and December 26, 2014.
Current status: Good article

I deleted an item under paragraph "Corrections" because the writer was attempting to use lines of poetry to rebut the contemporaneous documents of the Northern Lighthouse Board. GMB 26.6.06----

I'm going to delete the entire mystery section of the article and write another. As is, the section actually champions, albeit implicitly, a supernatural interpretation of the event. While the occurrence is certainly spooky, most agree that the men were probably simply swept out to sea by a large wave. Havardj, 14:58 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree. --JBellis 06:55, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All three men at the same time?? Unlikely, at best. Likewise, the notion of spirits or UFOs is not ludicrous, in and of themselves, given the sheer volume of strange events reported throughout history; what is ludicrous here is including reference to them, save only as offered explanations, without any legitimate connection shown. --Chr.K. 17:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was employed by the Northern Lighthouse Board for 10 years and did work on the Flannans Light. The explanation is perfectly reasonable given the unpredictable seas that wash over these islands. The most plausible scenario is that while two keepers had gone to the landing, and being gone for an extended time, the third went to check on them and tried to rescue a survivor and both were swept way by another large wave. He may have heard a faint call for help, hence the lack of weather proof gear and the half eaten meal. Closing the door behind him would have been a natural reaction in foul weather, no one wants to come back to a flooded kitchen. I have been on the Bell Rock lighthouse when freak waves washed green half way up the tower and on Muckle Flugga when the spray was lashing the lantern and the whole rock shook with the power of the seas. The sea took them, there is no mystery. Glenhuon 8/9/2006

I think it is reasonable that the text about the mystery should not focus on explaining it scientifically/rationally, it should focus on explaining what myths have been circling in media/folklore. Titling it as a "mystery" kind of makes it clear that it is not an explanation about what really happened, but an explanation what is populary believed to have happened.--RipperDoc 07:06, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have completed a re-write of the main body of the article the excluding the mystery section. I intend to come back later and have a go at that too as well as tweaking the rest. The protestations of my old friend Fear Liath notwithstanding I would hope to take a less senational approach than the current version re the 'mystery'. Ben MacDui (Talk) 19:12, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious about the "enigmatic log entries;" do they relate to the disappearance? Or just 3 socially isolated men letting things get to them? Just wondering. ProfessorPaul 06:23, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've read quotes from the log entries in some articles, but it is not clear if these log entries were the real thing, or just something made up by the authors. I will see if I can find any usable references about the log entries.--RipperDoc 07:06, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okey, I found some log entries, but I cant seem to find the source. Let me quote parts of it:

'December 12: Gale, north by northwest. Sea lashed to fury. Stormbound. 9 p.m. Never seen such a storm. Waves very high. Tearing at lighthouse. Everything shipshape. Ducat irritable.'

Moore and the captain glanced at each other. On 12 December no storm had been reported at Lewis, 20 miles away. The reference to Ducat's temper was also unusual.

The next entry had been written the same day at midnight,

'Storm still raging. Wind steady. Stormbound. Cannot go out. Ship passing sounding foghorn. Could see lights of cabins. Ducat quiet. McArthur crying.'

Again Moore and the captain stared at each other. What extremity could have caused the veteran seaman, Donald McArthur to weep? They read on,

'December 13: Storm continued through night. Wind shifted west by north. Ducat quiet. McArthur praying.'

Yesterday McArthur had been crying, today he prayed.

'12 Noon. Grey daylight. Me, Ducat and McArthur prayed.'

I can see no reference to these mysterious entries in any of the literature quoted in the references. I suspect they are a misconception and have removed them from the curent revision. Ben MacDui (Talk) 13:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I now believe that these references to the logs are to be found in the humorously titled Evil Scotland a 2003 publication by Ron Halliday. Apparently this gentleman is the Scottish 'Spooky Mulder'. The next time I am passing the Orc's Nest bookshop I will attempt to find out if he himself refers to his sources, but I fear not. --Ben MacDui (Talk) 13:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion of the logbook entries appeared here The Vanishing Lighthousemen of Eilean Mor - the original includes footnoted source references. Mikedash (talk) 12:06, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The mysterious logbook entries

Of all the strange circumstances surrounding the disappearance of the three light-keepers, perhaps the most peculiar is the reputed existence of odd and even mystical entries in the station’s log.

Vincent Gaddis, who based his account on a 1920s American pulp magazine article ‘derived from English sources’, states that the mysterious logbook entries were written in Thomas Marshall’s hand and read as follows:

Dec. 12: Gale, north by north-west. Sea lashed to fury. Stormbound 9pm. Never seen such a storm. Everything shipshape. Ducat irritable. 12pm. Storm still raging. Wind steady. Stormbound. Cannot go out. Ship passed sounding foghorn. Could see lights of cabins. Ducat quiet. McArthur crying.

Dec. 13: Storm continued through night. Wind shifted west by north. Ducat quiet. McArthur praying. 12 noon. Grey daylight. Me, Ducat, and McArthur prayed.

Dec. 15: 1pm. Storm ended. Sea calm. God is over all.

Several writers who repeat or précis these entries, including Gaddis and Michael Harrison, assert – not unnaturally – that they are extremely strange. Gaddis observes that ‘the men could hardly have been swept away by [the] storm, if there had been one, for according to the log the storm had passed when the last entry was made. The storm was over and peace had come.’ He adds:

Ducat, usually very good-natured, had just returned from his leave on shore. Why should he be irritable?... McArthur, a hardened, veteran seaman44 who had weathered the sea’s worst blows, well known as a lusty, fearless brawler on land, crying! What could have been the mysterious, extraordinary situation that would make strong McArthur weep?

And Harrison, always inclined to the sensational, labels the log ‘disturbing’ and puts himself in the position of the three light-keepers:

Whatever was happening, or whatever ghastly doom seemed to be threatening [on 14 December], now included the log-keeper, Marshall, in its menace. For on the following day, this was the solitary, brief and sinister entry: ‘Grey daylight. Me, Ducat and McArthur prayed.’

It was all but the last entry, and with that last mysterious entry – ‘God is over all’ – made on 15 December, the log closed, and the three terrified, praying men vanished for ever from this world.

It is probably best to state, first, that it remains possible to read the entries as unusual but explicable descriptions of nothing more sinister than the effects of depression on three isolated men. However, the supposed log book entries are mysterious in several ways beside their potentially supernatural overtones. There is at least one error – the log for 12 December in which the entry for 12pm follows one for 9pm – which would be incredible in a typically precise nautical log, and suggests either a clumsy hoax or, at best, careless copying which might put the accuracy of the rest of the information in doubt. It is also odd that the log is said to have been kept exclusively by Thomas Marshall, who as Second Assistant Keeper was both the youngest and – since McArthur was doing duty for William Ross, the First Assistant, technically the most junior of the three men on Eilean Mór. (The standard nautical practice is for each officer of the watch to make his own entries in the log.)

Moreover, the whole tone of the supposed document is quite peculiar. It is, for example, difficult to believe that Marshall would have made insubordinate notes about his superior, Ducat, in an official log. His suggestion that the Principal Keeper had been ‘irritable’ would be read not only by the Commissioners of the Northern Lighthouse Board – who might conceivably require him to justify his comments – but presumably also by Ducat himself, who might certainly object to their being presented to the Board in Edinburgh. Marshall’s supposed musings actually read like entries in a diary, though no authority has ever suggested they are anything other than a dry official log.

Indeed, the whole point of log books is that they are places for noting simple facts: dates, times, weather conditions, the height of waves and so on. They are certainly not intended to record the times prayers were said, or mere impressions, such as ‘sea lashed to fury’, much less something as unimportant – indeed irrelevant – as the passing moods of men. It would hardly be peculiar, during a routine and tedious turn of duty, for a lighthouseman to be ‘quiet’, so why would Marshall think to note the fact? Sensationalist writers have hinted that the notes were made because the men were increasingly aware of looming, supernatural disaster. I believe they point, rather, to the entries being a fabrication. Ducat’s and Macarthur’s moods of 12 and 13 December are significant only because of what happened to them on the 15th. To me that implies all three entries were written after 15 December 1900.

Such criticisms are, admittedly, mere conjecture. But firm evidence of fraud does exist – once one returns to original sources not readily accessible to a lazy hoaxer. Both the records of the Northern Lighthouse Board and contemporary press reports make it clear that Flannan station’s log book was kept only up to 13 December, with subsequent entries being noted, in chalk, on a slate for later transfer to the book; the notion of a log extending as late as 15 December is a fallacy. Even if we are charitable, and count the entries on the slate as part of the log proper, it is explicitly stated that the lighthousemen’s last notes (a simple record of the weather conditions) were written at 9am on the morning of 15 December. The contemporary record is clear that no entry was made as late as 1pm. This must imply that the supposed log whose entries are quoted so frequently in the Fortean secondary literature is a hoax.

Surely there's no logic in an island being in a people category. If you were to include places where people have died but their bodies never found/identified it would be a very long list - many battles esp at sea, WWII concentration camps, , gulags, Horoshima, and bombed cites such as Hamburg. --JBellis 19:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose you could argue that the islands are notable, in part, because of a mysterious disappearance. However you will hear no complaint from me. --Ben MacDui (Talk) 20:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly meets GA criteria. Passed. Da54 14:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have amended this recent edit for two reasons. Firstly the prior edit contained a minor non sequitour. There may be evidence that this work of fiction caused people to believe the Flannans were actually visited by extra-terrestrials, but the source doesn't say that. It indicates that the mystery was the inspiration for the fictional drama, not that the drama provides an explanation of the mystery. Secondly web citations should have a minimum of a title, publisher and access date. There are a couple of others that need fixing I will attend to asap. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 17:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone explain how/why "Railway Tracks" are listed amongst the expenses for building the lighthouse, and again amongst the storm damage? What exactly was someone doing building a railway in this location, and what was its scope/extent? 78.146.89.214 (talk) 17:58, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's explained here: http://www.irsociety.co.uk/Archives/10/orcadian_railways.htm "The Northern Lighthouse Commissioners have their service depot in Stromness and use a little standard gauge track for moving buoys on a trolley. They also have a 2ft 6in system which appears to have been laid when the base was installed in the 1890‘s. This system serves their own pier and includes several oddities in the way of points and loops. When we were present a tame otter patrolled the system! The Commissioners have installed track of the same gauge at some of their lighthouses, where a cable hauled bogie is used to land stores. The only one I have visited is on Sules Skerry, one of a pair of islands about 38 miles west of the Orkney group. A similar system, including a point, exists on the Flannan Isles off the west coast of the Hebrides, and I have heard that there is one on Muckle Flugga, the penultimate northerly rock in Great Britain." Ghughesarch (talk) 20:31, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Flannan Isles/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

This is a lovely little article but I do have a few comments:

• Presumably the Smith referred to in notes such as "Smith (2004) nonetheless states: "A meal of cold meat, pickles and potatoes was untouched on the kitchen table" is actually Haswell-Smith?

 Done

• The Haswell-Smith reference appears to be duplicated in the References section.

 Done

• Several of the books used as sources seem to be missing isbns.

 Done

• There ought to be page numbers given when a published source is cited. Better to separate out the published sources into a Bibliography section.

 Done

• Retrieval dates in the References section are inconsistent. Some say "Retrieved 8 June 2008", while others say "Retrieved on 2009-09-03".

 Done

• Reference #22 looks like it may have gone dead.

 Done

--Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 20:25, 7 October 2008 (UTC) That's all for tonite - I'll check it again tomorrow, Ben MacDui 20:05, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• • Good enough for me. I'm closing this review now as a keep. Thanks for the work you've done Ben MacDui. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 20:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would it not be better to create an article for the Flannan Isles Mystery, or disappearance, whatever its colloquial term, as it appears to have more coverage on the article than the actual islands. I think this disappearance is well known and famous enough to merit its own article, along with Valentich and Flight 19.PhilOak (talk) 22:20, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't know about "better" but there is certainly sufficient material available to create such an article. The main problem might be maintaining a credible degree of objectivity given the interest such subjects sometimes command. As may be apparent from the above discussions, separating fact from fiction is key. Ben MacDui 19:37, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I've merged the mystery content into Flannan Isles Lighthouse because that is a very short article, and the content is better suited there as the location of the incident, rather than here where it is longer than the rest of the article.  Sandstein  12:05, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone doing any research on the subject is reading this I would like to suggest considering the known rouge wave phenomenon named "three sisters" as the cause, where three rogue waves strike in close succession. Facts that point out to that being the case: 2 men were out in raincoats doing some work (securing something?) the third rushed out without his due to an emergency and they all vanished: when one of the earlier waves of the three swept the two people outside off the cliff (or left them barely clinging to a bent rail or something) the third one attracted by the huge onrush of water that would be hard to miss, rushed to their aid only to be himself swept by one of the latter ones. It is possible that a sole wave is responsible if some other emergency forced the third man out (wind throwing one of the two off balance or so) - only to meet the sudden single ill-timed wave that swept them all at once, but I consider the three sisters more likely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.110.196.83 (talk) 18:03, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Flannan Isles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070313003106/http://www.appins.org:80/martin.htm to http://www.appins.org/martin.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]