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

British and Irish hills 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 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. UK geography Low‑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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

H-S states 77 ha, as does Gazetteer.

United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre states 86.5ha which is more or less what I make it with "field measurement".

I am inclined to change to 86. Any other sources or any dissent? Finavon (talk) 21:55, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't see this thread earlier. If the area gets changed so does the ranking of this and various others. Ben MacDui 21:06, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "revised nomination at www.kilda.org.uk agree that the total area of the WHS above Mean High Water Springs is 854.6ha. I don't see any individual measurements here. H-Smith has 670+99+77 for the three largest islands, making 846 and leaving 10ha for Levenish etc. The main difference between the two is Hirta, which they measure at 660.5 (inc Dun), 10 ha less than H-Smith, and Boreray. I agree that the unep is probably a more authoratitive measurement, but unless we start adding footnotes to the "area by rank" table (and maybe put it into main space), I think there is room for confusion and potentially claims of OR if we are not careful. Ben MacDui 11:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Prehistoric finds on remote St Kilda's Boreray isle, BBC and pics
• Iron Age settlement found on one of Europe's most inhospitable islands, Daily Mail
• Prehistoric settlement on remote Scottish isle dates back to Iron Age, bioscholar.com

etc etc --Mais oui! (talk) 21:14, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neither the sentence (in the History section) nor the reference given in the footnote (because I don't have access to that reference), is clear about the length of time these men and boys were marooned. If, for example, they were marooned in April of 1724 and rescued in May, 1724 that would be one thing, while if they were marooned from January of 1724 to May of 1725, that would be more notable.

I do have this source although for various reasons I can't access it right now. The reason for the party to be on Boreray would likely be to collect eggs and birds, which would be during the nesting season. I will look this up as soon as I can but my guess is that there is no firm date available for these events. There is a certain amount of distracting tectonic activity going on in my affairs at present - if I don't reply within the next 3 weeks pls ping me. Ben MacDui 12:07, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Boreray, St Kilda. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20110923000000/http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/vli/language/gaelic/pdfs/placenamesA-B.pdf to http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/vli/language/gaelic/pdfs/placenamesA-B.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160110172858/http://www.kilda.org.uk/ to http://www.kilda.org.uk/

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) 04:06, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]