This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject British and Irish hills, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the hills and mountains of Great Britain and Ireland 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.British and Irish hillsWikipedia:WikiProject British and Irish hillsTemplate:WikiProject British and Irish hillsBritish and Irish hills articles
This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain articles
There are individual Hewitt lists on but all of their data is at least 10 years old (if not 15 years), and many heights have changed since then. In addition, it is not possible to search and rank them in one main table (plus some have no prominence data). Also, they list unusual "parent" data for mountains that are already parents (e.g. in climbing terms, parents should not have parents). Britishfinance (talk) 12:34, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article claims that "Because of the prominence threshold of only 15 metres (49.2 ft), the list is subject to ongoing revisions" it is easy enough to verify that all UK hill lists based on criteria have seen ongoing revisions - because of the Nuttalls list. The unusual thing about the Nuttalls was that they were the first to include amateur surveying in their selection (see the books) which over the years has got more and more professional which resulted in the changes (see the reference d article). This approach was adopted by other lists and now it's standard practice. 2A00:23C5:4E9F:5D01:5065:F19E:F667:1C8D (talk) 20:23, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}