Talk:Darwin's Arch

How old was it?

Was anyone ever able to date it before the collapse? Ribbet32 (talk) 02:57, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

It's unlikely that there's any suitable 'field evidence' to provide a date since the likely progression from rock promontory to arch to remaining pillar(s) would have occurred over a period, which have may have been protracted or relatively short. The likelihood is that an initially small arch was enlarged by rockfall in successive stages. It is possible however that there may be accounts post-1535 (first recorded visitation) relating to its development. cheers Geopersona (talk) 04:23, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Updated Image?

On the front page of Wikipedia today (2021-05-20), the "In the news" section has a little blurb about the arch collapsing. It would be nice for this page to show what it currently looks like. --198.101.118.150 (talk) 10:53, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Agreed! Likeanechointheforest (talk) 19:43, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Yes. We need an aftermath photo. Jehochman ^Talk 20:45, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

The problem is the remoteness of the island - unless a Wiki contributor happens to be in the area and takes a photo to donate, the paucity of non-copyright photos may be a problem. I would suggest posting on bio or paleo bulletin boards, to inquire if any scientist(s) are in the area with a camera and an urge to donate.104.169.31.99 (talk) 06:58, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

How exactly does Wikipedia's content policy work? Would it be possible to get in contact with the copyright holder of the current image circling around of the collapsed arch and get their permission in writing to use the image? Because you're right− due to the remoteness, it would probably be years until a photo can be taken by a Wiki contributor Eggventura (talk) 00:40, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

The process for getting permission is Commons:OTRS; see also Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. --Pokechu22 (talk) 00:57, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Eggventura (talk) 19:05, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

It appears that no good photo of it before the collapse is in Commons. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 01:05, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Martinglass83 (talk · contribs) - did you take the images yourself? The one of the pillars appear on the face of it to be one circulating on the web presently taken by a Hector Barrera - see citation in article. cheers Geopersona (talk) 11:55, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I'll be attempting to get in contact with Mr. Barrera soon– hopefully he'll say yes and we'll have the updated image up soon Eggventura (talk) 19:05, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Disregard, see Image Permissions for Collapsed Arch Eggventura (talk) 21:11, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Darwin Island Area

This article says Darwin Island is 2.33 sq km but the Darwin Island topic says 1 sq km. Jafaucett (talk) 18:30, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Due to gravity?

Is it necessary to say that the arch "collapsed due to erosion and gravity"? That seems pretty awkward and self-evident to me, especially given the word "collapsed". Unless there is a reason to clarify that it was not intentional or directly caused by human behavior, I think that "and gravity" should be omitted.

The Legend of iPhoenix (talk) 01:13, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Suggest move to "Pillars of Evolution"

I'm suggesting this because keeping the former name for the pillars before the collapse up is just weird. If the name is vetoed because it's unofficial, we could always just call then the "Darwin island pillars". Sammy2012 (talk) 14:15, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Bit soon for that, I think. Whilst I suspect it may stick, after all it has a certain ring to it, this new name has just sprung up informally in the last few days whereas 'Darwin's Arch' has quite a pedigree. And the locality was famous for the arch and is now even more famous for having had an arch which collapsed. The arch on the Maltese coast known as the Azure Window is now history too but the article name remains. cheers Geopersona (talk) 15:47, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Image Permissions for Collapsed Arch

Hey everyone,

I see there's now a "Before and After" file on the article, but as far as I can tell it is not in fact original work and is actually two copyrighted images edited together. As far as I know, this doesn't constitute own work.

Also, unfortunate news on getting permissions from Hector Barrera for image usage. On an article from the Kyiv Post, it says this as to image permisions:

"Photo by Hector BARRERA / Ecuador's Ministry of Environment / AFP) / RESTRICTED TO EDITORIAL USE - MANDATORY CREDIT AFP PHOTO / ECUADOR'S ENVIRONMENT MINISTRY / HECTOR BARRERA - NO MARKETING NO ADVERTISING CAMPAIGNS -DISTRIBUTED AS A SERVICE TO CLIENTS"

I am by no means well versed in copyright law, but this seems like a death knell to getting image permissions from Barrera– please let me know what "MANDATORY CREDIT AFP PHOTO," "NO MARKETING NO ADVERTISING CAMPAIGNS," and "-DISTRUBUTED AS A SERVICE TO CLIENTS" would mean in regards to receiving permissions.

That aside, would there be a way to put a banner on the article saying that getting an updated image is currently in progress but held up by copyright struggles? Eggventura (talk) 19:19, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

The current "before and after" image is currently nominated for deletion on commons. --Pokechu22 (talk) 19:25, 23 May 2021 (UTC)